Jive Mofo

Mixing Pop and Politics...

Obama's Rope-A-Dope

I applaud Liquidator for turning to the arts -- a lead I will follow soon, as the mixture of politics to pop has been a bit too rich for my engine lately.

But I do want to be the first to state this: Obama has every intention of prosecuting people in the government for torture. The far left is completely wrong in heavily criticizing Obama for not taking a stronger stand on torture within the CIA and other government agencies.

But Obama has little interest in prosecuting Milgram's 37. They were just doing what they were told.

Obama's clearly going after the people at the very top who gave the orders. And the way you do that is by giving the people in the middle immunity.

We Do What We're Told (Milgram's 37) by Peter Gabriel

Comments

How to Lose a War Without Really Trying

Well, I have not completely turned to the arts....... and I will endeavor to keep the mixture of pop and politics at a high-octane level.

I will agree with you for once that Obama does indeed intend to prosecute high-ranking members of the Bush administration, perhaps even George Bush himself, for the ludicrous crime of authorizing so-called torture of the worst enemies of the American people and republic. This idea is so bad that it is difficult for me to oppose it with rational detachment. There are so many things dangerous about this absurd intention that I am at a loss of where to begin. It will establish the awful precident of a new administration placing members of the previous administration on trial for its policy decisions, making a 200-year tradition of the smooth transition of power a thing of the past. And it will make it much more difficult, if not impossible, for the United States to ever effectively fight and win another war. Not to mention little things like the end of all effective human intelligence gathering or the possibility of preventing another catastrophic terrorist attack. This silly idea will be celebrated by all the enemies of the United States from Pyongyang, Caracas and Tehran to the the streets of Londonistan and mountain caves of northern Pakistan to the Crazy Mosques and al Qaeda cells right here at home.

Let me say that we can all thank the Almighty that Obama, or even Al Gore, was not the President after 9/11 and that George W. Bush was the President. President Bush did what he had to do to make this nation secure and some of those measures were outside the Marquis de Queensbury rulebook and part of the Jack Bauer rulebook. The actions taken by the President on the advice of members of his cabinet, legal and military advisors and the CIA were mild in comparison to what other Presidents have done in waging wars and suppressing rebellion. In this Never Never Land of Obama and company, Presidents such as Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, McKinley, Teddy Roosevelt, Wilson, FDR, Truman, Kennedy, LBJ, Nixon, Reagan and others are guilty of war crimes and should be labeled as such in our history text books...... and I am sure they will be in time with the approval of the Department of Education.

First of all it is big fat lie. Torture as a policy is defined as the infliction of severe, unendurable pain, permanent crippling injuries and sadistic cruelties on victims held as prisoners of war, captured insurgents, political prisoners or terrorists. Waterboarding causes neither death, severe pain nor permanent injury and is regarded by most intelligence experts as a stressful interrogation technique, not as torture. Every U.S. special operations soldier, Marine and Navy SEAL is waterboarded as part of their training and no one has ever died from it. Colorado's own Gunny Bob has been waterboarded and seems to be uneffected by the experience. It was used by the CIA on just three people and elicited vital information in time to save thousands of lives and billions in property loss. Other stressful measures, including raised voices, slaps, sleep deprivation and bright lights, were used and none of them would have been regarded by the Gestapo, the KGB or Castro's DGI as torture techniques. Those masters of the arts of torture would have looked at the stressful American techniques as amateur night.

After 9/11, I would have been willing to see much harsher methods authorized by the White House than those adopted and I have little doubt a majority of the American people would have concurred with me on this score. The President acted with restraint and practical measures to keep America safe during a period of unprecidented danger. It would be an obscenity to put the President or Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Condi Rice, or Alberto Gonzales on trial. Never again could the President rely on getting sound advice in a crisis from the people around him. All would have to bear in mind that they could face prosecution in the event someone decided to criminalize that advice. These Stalinist show trial would be the single most effective means to guarantee that we will not only lose the war against Islamic terrorism, but all future wars to protect out interests and secure the survival of the nation.

Nevertheless, I have no doubt that Obama will at least attempt to do this and it will backfire right in his face. For in a trial, the Defense will demand to see the CIA records that will indicate stressful interrogations did elicit vital information from the most evil of men that saved American civilian lives. And the American people in their wisdom will see the defendents as victims of persecution by a naive and vengeful administration. It is the one action by Obama that has the potential of making George Bush, Richard Cheney and Don Rumsfeld popular again.

Lyman's Law Number Seven is what applies here and it is a simple one. It states that the scandals, crimes and misdemeanors of a Republican President and the people around him will almost invariably be an excess of zeal in defending the United States from those who wish her destruction.... ie: the bombing of Communist supply routes and troop concentrations in Cambodia, providing illegal aid to the Contras in Nicaragua, wiretapping Americans making phone calls to al Qaeda operatives abroad and getting a little rough in a nice quiet place with some of Allah's warriors of God. The inverse is that scandals, crimes and misdemeanors of Democratic Presidents and the people around them will almost invariably be some kind of a moral lapse, either for financial gain or for sexual gratification. I have no doubt that will hold true during the next four years.

Lyman's Laws

Can we get a post that outlines Lyman's laws in all their glory? I'm hoping for ten so I can carve them in stone and place the in front of the courthouse.

I Think That is an Excellent Idea...... Maybe in Marble

I have actually considered putting Lyman's Laws down in book form for the edification of the American people. Unlike God, whose brevity I admire, it is hard for me to be limited to just ten rules and they cover a wide spectrum of geopolitical, political, social, military and financial areas of the human condition. You will hear more of them with apologies to Amos Burke.

God's rules, otherwise known as the Commandments, are now banned from the courthouse premises in most jurisdictions. Oh, how the Founding Fathers in 1790 would be astonished and outraged if they knew how the establishment clause in the First Amendment of their Constitution would one day be interpreted. Of course, they would never believe such a thing possible........ about as likely as people of the same sex legally marrying each other in puritan New England.

Yes, they'd be appalled...

What do you think the founding fathers would think of a black president? Or the interpretation of the Second Amendment that justifies the ownership of assault rifles?

The wisdom of the founding fathers was that, unlike God, they did not wish the world to be guided by their exact words long after they had left the scene...

James Madison Was Way Ahead of You

You are simply wrong, Mr Wirtes. The Founders fully expected their words to be read and understood in the context of their time. They knew that national conditions and the needs of the citizenry would change over the course of time and that is the reason they put a mechanism within the Constitution for changing it, actually two mechanisms. The primary mechanism is the Amendment process and our Constitution has been amended 27 times since 1791. It is not easy to amend the Constitution. You need to get your desired amendment approved by two thirds of the House and Senate and ratified by the legislatures of three quarters of the states, but if there is enough of a national will to do so, the Founding document can be amended. It can also be changed if three quarters of the states call for a Constitutional Convention, which, obviously, they have never done. The Founders did not want changes in the Constition to be easy and purposely made it a difficult process. We are fortunate that they did so.

The Founding Fathers, most of them, were products of the 18th Century Enlightenment and as such I do not think they would be at all astonished or appalled by the race of President Obama in 2009. Benjamin Franklin, in fact, practically invented the anti-slavery movement and his sentiments were shared by John Adams, Jefferson and many others among the signers of the Declaration of Independence and authors of the Constitution. Before Ben Franklin and the Pennsylvania Quakers, hardly anyone anywhere had even questioned the institution of slavery and it was a near universal social institution in which few even found to be immoral. What they would be appalled by is Obama's ideology, which I believe they would have seen as a mortal threat to individual freedom and the survival of the Republic as they would have understood the word.

As for so-called assault rifles, by which you mean semi-automatic military-style rifled firearms, they would have understood that weapons of this type are the modern equivalent of the Pennsylvania and Kentucky long rifles of their time and as such are exactly what they meant in the Second Amendment as the right to keep and bear arms. Those Pennsylvania and Kentucky rifled muskets were every bit as lethal as the weapons of today in the hands of frontiersmen, settlers and civilian militias like the Minutemen of Massachusetts. If in doubt of this, I suggest you read accounts of the heaps of redcoat bodies on the slopes of Breeds and Bunker Hill, the hundreds of Tories slaughtered at the battles of Cowpens and Kings Mountain, the more than 2000 dead and wounded among Wellington's crack veterans in front of the Rodriguez Canal at New Orleans and the piles of Mexican dead beneath the walls of the Alamo.

I leave you with the written words of James Madison, a small, frail man who was the primary author of the Constitution and a giant in our history. " I entirely concur in the propriety of resorting to the sense in which the Constitution was accepted and ratified by the nation. In that sense alone is it a legitimate Constitution. And if that be not a guide in expounding it, there can be no security for a consistant and stable, more than for a faithful exercise of its powers." It sounds like he was an originalist in the same sense as Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Scalia, Thomas and Alito as well as yours truly.

Imagine...

Imagine Jefferson and Madison chatting with Limbaugh and O'Reilly. It would be like Watson and Crick meeting Cheech and Chong...