Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

"And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times
when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this.
I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America
who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if
thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden
in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly
severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it
went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all,
would say, Do what you have to do.

So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different
deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


So itÂ’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when youÂ’re in the foxhole, itÂ’s a very different deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On May 13, 12:18*pm, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal.."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

It's just a tactic, kind of like Lobsta' Boats and German/American
screwdrivers... Soundbites for elections. Remember Hillary's personal
firefight? I think the congress should be spending it's time finding
out why 1-2/3 of soldiers votes were not counted in the last election,
or why gas is up to $2.50 again. Remember, Pelosi said that was going
to be job 1 when she took the lead.. It has been a disaster ever
since, companies can't even plan ahead because of the volatility...
That's what's important, not who you can "Scooter Libby/Trent Lott,
Newt Gingrich" out of an office...

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


So itÂ’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when youÂ’re in the foxhole, itÂ’s a very different deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?


At least as much as Cheney.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-) It's still right at
$2.00 hereabouts.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 11:18:47 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


So it?s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when you?re in the foxhole, it?s a very different deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

Got me - I assume that he knows if he said it. :)

The point, I think, is that the CIA and the Bush administration got
much different feedback on Congressional expectations for securing the
nation from another devastating terrorist attack.

That mandate got reinforced in Congressional briefings on the EITs,
where people like Nancy Pelosi not only never objected, but some of
them asked whether the CIA was being tough enough on Abu Zubaydah,
Ramzi Binalshibh, and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The only one who did
object is Jane Harman and she said so openly.

If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board
- let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Hyprocrisy on this issue is rampant. Compare and contrast.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9bg6Zs6vcws

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-) It's still right at
$2.00 hereabouts.

I filled up Yo Ho's tank yesterday, 71 gallons at $2.05 a gallon.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:30:21 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board -
let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut. Oh, and I'm still waiting for
Hannity's waterboarding for charity. That would be pay for view at it's
finest. ;-)

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:30:21 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board -
let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut. Oh, and I'm still waiting for
Hannity's waterboarding for charity. That would be pay for view at it's
finest. ;-)


Kind of funny that Tommy wants to spread around "punishment" for
decisions entirely within the purview of the Bush mis-Administration.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:50:31 -0400, HK wrote:


Kind of funny that Tommy wants to spread around "punishment" for
decisions entirely within the purview of the Bush mis-Administration.

If laws were broken, I'm an equal opportunity kind of guy. Hang 'em all.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:50:31 -0400, HK wrote:


Kind of funny that Tommy wants to spread around "punishment" for
decisions entirely within the purview of the Bush mis-Administration.

If laws were broken, I'm an equal opportunity kind of guy. Hang 'em all.


What laws were broken by Democrats in torture? The policies and
implementation of same were promulgated by the Bush Administration.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...y-on-trial.jpg

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:00:15 -0400, HK wrote:


If laws were broken, I'm an equal opportunity kind of guy. Hang 'em
all.


What laws were broken by Democrats in torture? The policies and
implementation of same were promulgated by the Bush Administration.

http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b2...ous/cheney-on-
trial.jpg

*If* laws were broken...

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times
when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this.
I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America
who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if
thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden
in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly
severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it
went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all,
would say, Do what you have to do.

So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different
deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

Schumer is welcome to his ignorance. He's among the more compromised
senators in the business so it doesn't surprise me. There are a
variety of opinions out there. Picking one is not a representation of
the whole.

Unless you're talking Republicans, who can vote in lockstep against
any legislation whether practical or not, for political effect.

Let's talk to Eric Cantor about that, okay?

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On May 13, 12:29*pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
On May 13, 12:18 pm, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal."
Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004
What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

It's just a tactic, kind of like Lobsta' Boats and German/American
screwdrivers... Soundbites for elections. Remember Hillary's personal
firefight? I think the congress should be spending it's time finding
out why 1-2/3 of soldiers votes were not counted in the last election,
or why gas is up to $2.50 again. Remember, Pelosi said that was going
to be job 1 when she took the lead.. It has been a disaster ever
since, companies can't even plan ahead because of the volatility...
That's what's important, not who you can "Scooter Libby/Trent Lott,
Newt Gingrich" out of an office...

Why are you concerned about the economy? You sure as hell are not part
of it.

"1-2/3" of soldiers votes were not counted..."

Is that less than two soldiers?

You didn't actually get through a Connecticut high school, did you? With
a diploma?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Every single person who lives in the United States of America is part
of the economy. Are you stuck on stupid today?
Where's that Yale diploma?

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times
when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this.
I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America
who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if
thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden
in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly
severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it
went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all,
would say, Do what you have to do.

So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different
deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

Schumer is welcome to his ignorance. He's among the more compromised
senators in the business so it doesn't surprise me. There are a
variety of opinions out there. Picking one is not a representation of
the whole.

Unless you're talking Republicans, who can vote in lockstep against
any legislation whether practical or not, for political effect.

Let's talk to Eric Cantor about that, okay?



Don't GOP legislators have to call Rush before they vote or speak? :)


Rush, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor, and Newt Gingrich,
your GOP leadership for 2010.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:25:14 -0400, HK wrote:

jps wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock
wrote:

"And I’d like to interject a note of balance here. There are times
when we all get in high dudgeon. We ought to be reasonable about this.
I think there are probably very few people in this room or in America
who would say that torture should never, ever be used, particularly if
thousands of lives are at stake.

Take the hypothetical: If we knew that there was a nuclear bomb hidden
in an American city and we believed that some kind of torture, fairly
severe maybe, would give us a chance of finding that bomb before it
went off, my guess is most Americans and most senators, maybe all,
would say, Do what you have to do.

So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different
deal."

Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004

Schumer is welcome to his ignorance. He's among the more compromised
senators in the business so it doesn't surprise me. There are a
variety of opinions out there. Picking one is not a representation of
the whole.

Unless you're talking Republicans, who can vote in lockstep against
any legislation whether practical or not, for political effect.

Let's talk to Eric Cantor about that, okay?


Don't GOP legislators have to call Rush before they vote or speak? :)


Rush, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor, and Newt Gingrich,
your GOP leadership for 2010.

They don't need to call, they just channel him. Psychic goosestep.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 11:48:50 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:30:21 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board -
let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut.

You can't just single him out, assuming that this is found to be
criminal. Anybody who knew is complicite in their silence - that is a
simple truth proven by the Nuremburg trials - the fact that you knew
and didn't object is not a defense. I believe that there is also US
case law that supports that view.

Expect this to die a quick and quiet death because if it doesn't,
we're going to be without a large number of Congress critters in the
future.

Oh, and I'm still waiting for Hannity's waterboarding for charity.
That would be pay for view at it's finest. ;-)

I don't know anything about that, but if he made the offer, he's an
idiot. It's not a pleasant experience.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 11:29:30 -0500, thunder
wrote:

On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-)

That's the freakin' truth.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

HK wrote:
wrote:
On May 13, 12:18 pm, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal."
Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004
What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

It's just a tactic, kind of like Lobsta' Boats and German/American
screwdrivers... Soundbites for elections. Remember Hillary's personal
firefight? I think the congress should be spending it's time finding
out why 1-2/3 of soldiers votes were not counted in the last election,
or why gas is up to $2.50 again. Remember, Pelosi said that was going
to be job 1 when she took the lead.. It has been a disaster ever
since, companies can't even plan ahead because of the volatility...
That's what's important, not who you can "Scooter Libby/Trent Lott,
Newt Gingrich" out of an office...


Why are you concerned about the economy? You sure as hell are not part
of it.

"1-2/3" of soldiers votes were not counted..."

Is that less than two soldiers?

You didn't actually get through a Connecticut high school, did you? With
a diploma?

Krause's Connecticut High school is ranked exactly where?
Look it up for yourself. James Hillhouse HS New London Ct.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

HK wrote:
thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-) It's still right
at $2.00 hereabouts.

I filled up Yo Ho's tank yesterday, 71 gallons at $2.05 a gallon.

That'll probably last you all summer.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On May 13, 3:09*pm, jim78565 wrote:
HK wrote:
wrote:
On May 13, 12:18 pm, thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:13:28 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:
So it’s easy to sit back in the armchair and say that torture can
never
be used. But when you’re in the foxhole, it’s a very different deal."
Senator Chuck Schumer, June 8, 2004
What would Schumer know about being in a foxhole?

It's just a tactic, kind of like Lobsta' Boats and German/American
screwdrivers... Soundbites for elections. Remember Hillary's personal
firefight? I think the congress should be spending it's time finding
out why 1-2/3 of soldiers votes were not counted in the last election,
or why gas is up to $2.50 again. Remember, Pelosi said that was going
to be job 1 when she took the lead.. It has been a disaster ever
since, companies can't even plan ahead because of the volatility...
That's what's important, not who you can "Scooter Libby/Trent Lott,
Newt Gingrich" out of an office...

Why are you concerned about the economy? You sure as hell are not part
of it.

"1-2/3" of soldiers votes were not counted..."

Is that less than two soldiers?

You didn't actually get through a Connecticut high school, did you? With
a diploma?

Krause's Connecticut High school is ranked exactly where?
Look it up for yourself. James Hillhouse HS New London Ct.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Man, that place sure is a dump! Especially for someone who's father
was very well off, new Ole Evinrude well, had the largest marina/
dealership in the eastern U.S., etc.!!

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

jim78565 wrote:
HK wrote:
thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-) It's still right
at $2.00 hereabouts.

I filled up Yo Ho's tank yesterday, 71 gallons at $2.05 a gallon.

That'll probably last you all summer.

Only if he runs the boat at WOT.

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and in
no way are to be considered flaws or defects

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:30:21 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board -
let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut. Oh, and I'm still waiting for
Hannity's waterboarding for charity. That would be pay for view at it's
finest. ;-)

We'll shut Cheney up if you shut up Al Gore.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:49:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 12:30:21 -0400, Wizard of Woodstock wrote:


If accountability is to be imposed, let it be imposed across the board -
let's not single out the Bush Administration if it's found to be a
criminal action.

Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut. Oh, and I'm still waiting for
Hannity's waterboarding for charity. That would be pay for view at it's
finest. ;-)

We'll shut Cheney up if you shut up Al Gore.

There's a moral equivalent. You betcha.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

"HK" wrote in message
...
thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 09:25:36 -0700, justwaitafrekinminute wrote:


why gas is up to $2.50 again.

That would be because you live in Connecticut. ;-) It's still right at
$2.00 hereabouts.

I filled up Yo Ho's tank yesterday, 71 gallons at $2.05 a gallon.

Was $2.32 at Costco today in Livermore, CA.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 14:32:02 -0400, Zombie of Woodstock wrote:


Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut.

You can't just single him out, assuming that this is found to be
criminal.

The thing about Cheney was mostly tongue in cheek. I have mixed emotions
about going after these guys. I don't feel the need for prosecutions,
but it is a democracy and we need to know what happened to keep it from
happening again. These guys, ill-advised as they were IMO, were working
for our benefit. I don't need vengeance. I just need it not to happen
again. But Cheney should keep his mouth shut.

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 18:49:59 -0400, BAR wrote:


We'll shut Cheney up if you shut up Al Gore.

LOL, while it might be possible to shut up Cheney, I don't think it's
possible to keep Gore quiet. ;-(

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:25:14 -0400, HK wrote:


Rush, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor, and Newt Gingrich,
your GOP leadership for 2010.

The scary thing, in that group, Newt almost seems like a normal human,
almost. ;-)

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 14:32:02 -0400, Zombie of Woodstock wrote:


Works for me, but, frankly, I'd settle for just Cheney. The SOB just
can't seem to keep his mouth shut.
You can't just single him out, assuming that this is found to be
criminal.

The thing about Cheney was mostly tongue in cheek. I have mixed emotions
about going after these guys. I don't feel the need for prosecutions,
but it is a democracy and we need to know what happened to keep it from
happening again. These guys, ill-advised as they were IMO, were working
for our benefit. I don't need vengeance. I just need it not to happen
again. But Cheney should keep his mouth shut.

I don't see how torturing prisoners is "working for our benefit."

Heh - well, isn't this interesting.
 

thunder wrote:
On Wed, 13 May 2009 13:25:14 -0400, HK wrote:


Rush, Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachman, Eric Cantor, and Newt Gingrich,
your GOP leadership for 2010.

The scary thing, in that group, Newt almost seems like a normal human,
almost. ;-)


That's only because of all the Republican wannabes, Newt is about the
only one that really is smart...confused, but smart. Hey, I'm very
satisfied with Rush, Palin, Bachman, Cantor, et cetera, speaking out for
the GOP on a regular basis. It solidifies that shrinking base...it gets
smaller every day, but...tougher.