Time Shortage

As you can see to the right, work is piling up (for which I am grateful, actually, in this economic environment), Yumi and Mary are heading off to Japan for a short visit, and I am still trying to squeeze in exercise time. So I am unable to post things on a regular basis, but I still watch the national and international scene with great interest (and some opinions, naturally).

Logic Tortured

A congressman asked Attorney General Holder the following question.
Are Navy SEALS subjected to water boarding as part of their training being tortured?

Holder: No, it's not torture in the legal sense because you're not doing it with the intention of harming these people physically or mentally, all we're trying to do is train them --

Lungren: So it's the question of intent?

Holder: Intent is a huge part.

Lungren: So if the intent was to solicit information but not do permanent harm, how is that torture?

Holder: Well, it... uh... it... one has to look at... ah... it comes out to question of fact as one is determining the intention of the person who is administering the waterboarding. When the Communist Chinese did it, when the Japanese did it, when they did it in the Spanish Inquisition we knew then that was not a training exercise they were engaging in. They were doing it in a way that was violative of all of the statutes recognizing what torture is. What we are doing to our own troops to equip them to deal with any illegal act -- that is not torture.

Ignoring the fact that Spanish Inquisition, the Chinese, and the Japanese were not subject any torture laws, it seems that what is being tortured here is logic.
If Navy Seals are not being tortured, how is it that detainees are being tortured using the exact same method? I think what Holder is trying to say is that it is a question of intent to harm, but neither the terrorists nor the Navy Seals are harmed by the method. So I can't accept that water boarding is torture. If water boarding is deemed to be torture, then maybe we should just ask the terrorist "Pretty please, just tell us what you know." The terrorist says "No." Interrogator says "Ok. You can go."

GOP Obituary?

I have seen many news reports and talking heads pronounce the GOP essentially dead and furthermore claim that the party must reformulate itself more toward the center. That formulation has never ever worked for the GOP, and a prime example of that is McCain.
However, looking at the latest Rasmussen poll, the obituary appears to be premature.
The Dems have been is power for only 5 months and already the public perception is swinging strongly in the GOP's favor.

The economy question is most striking. With the Dems printing and spending money like, well, errr, Democrats, the cumulative point swing is 12. The release of the torture documents produced a swing of 10 points on National Security. The threat of higher taxes produced a swing of 11 points. With a year and half to go to midterm elections, the Dems would be wise to reconsider some of their policies.

Empathy and the Law

President Obama has said that his main criterion for selecting a SCOTUS judge would be "empathy." Making judgments based on empathy can only lead to lawlessness, i.e., ignoring the law to judge in favor of a preferred group. Nevertheless, we all know that such "empathy-based judgments" have alread occurred - not so much with SCOTUS, but in lower circuit courts. If one does not like the law, one should work to change the law. The role of the courts is to make judgments soundly based in the law or to otherwise determine the constitutionality of a law. If the law is constitutional and one still does not like the law, one should attempt to change the constitution. Empathy should play no role.

Specter gets backbenched

I find myself amused at the treatment Specter is getting from the Democrats.
It is reported that Specter has been stripped of his seniority and he will now be treated as the most junior senator. I saw the press conference where the Dems assured Specter that he could keep his seniority, but now that he has switched, Reid is treating him like dirt.
Specter started out as a Dem long ago, but switched parties to run for some office in Philadelphia. Congresspersons :) occasionally switch parties, but most do it for political opportunity rather than political conviction. Specter is an opportunist that the Republicans are glad to be rid of (despite public statements to the contrary), and it appears the Dems don't trust him either.
He has been put on the junior varsity squad, the B team, the 5th quarter squad, and I am amused to see it.
I think he will lose the next election, whether it be in the Democrat primary or in the general election. I think the voters will not be amused by his fickleness.

Obama Supporters Ask "Why?"