Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
there you go again, ace. your "sunshine" apparently involves neither reading the available information nor thinking real hard about what you do take in. so by "fog" i assume you refer to that state of being in contact with actual information.
if you'd actually read this thread, it was pretty clear from the outset why bringing charges against the bush people would be a problem--it's also become clear over the past few days that the obama administration isn't able to do what it wanted to do, which was release this information and let the matter drop. this isn't over by a long shot, and people like you who still defend the bush administration's actions, based on paper-thin thinking in your case, will have ample time to go all gordon liddy and argue that there is no torture in any of the practices so long as a republican administration is behind them of course. the issue will end up being the limits placed on executive power by international convention. as an authoritarian, you would probably not recognise any such limits...but i think yours is an outworn worldview and one of the reasons that i think the trials--should they come--would be so beneficial for the united states is that they'd spell the absolute end of the possibility for folk who think as you do about power from ever holding it here.
i think that's a win-win situation.
enjoy the "sun"...
|
Our differences are pretty clear. It doesn't seem that we are even reading the same information or even what has been posted here.
Another difference is I can state my view in a simple declarative sentence. If it is clear the law was broken, press charges against those who violated the law. I understand "the problem" with bringing charges against a former President and that is why I say act one way or the other. What is it that needs further investigation? If your point is that this is not as "clear" as some believe, perhaps you should direct your comments to those folks, because I already know it is not "clear".