What are they going to think of next?

In an earlier AJC gig, I wrote a column about cool and cutting-edge technology. Those were simpler times.

But I still have a fascination with things such as … an implantable telescope!

“The device, which is smaller than a pencil eraser and can be implanted during an outpatient procedure, works a bit like a telephoto lens in a camera: it enlarges the image that falls onto the retina so that it extends beyond the damaged area. In human studies, 60 percent of patients could read at least three lines further on an eye chart after the telescope was implanted. The device is approved for use in Europe, and an advisory panel for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has unanimously recommended approval.”

63 comments Add your comment

Taxpayer

April 27th, 2009
3:27 pm

Who knows, Jay, what’s possible when you have people out there who believe in science.

ByteMe

April 27th, 2009
3:31 pm

We can build it.
We have the technology.
We can make him better than he was.
Better?
Stronger.
Faster…..

Midori

April 27th, 2009
3:33 pm

I just had a great idea: let’s plant one inside Andy’s head to see if there’s something else in there besides cobwebs.

I kid, Andy.

I kid :)

demwit

April 27th, 2009
3:34 pm

Wow! Which National Healthcare System invented this??

jt

April 27th, 2009
3:37 pm

Back in the 70s, I bought some X-ray glesses from an ad in the back of Boy’s life. What a rip-off.

I Report/ You Whine

April 27th, 2009
3:38 pm

Yeah, you’re gonna need a telescope to see what’s left of the federal treasury.

And what the dollar is worth.

eewwww

I Report/ You Whine

April 27th, 2009
3:43 pm

Hey, now maybe the Urinal will be able to see how much money they lose every week, hahahaha.

Funny, ain’t it?

Paul

April 27th, 2009
3:51 pm

jt

[[Back in the 70s, I bought some X-ray glesses from an ad in the back of Boy’s life. What a rip-off.]]

You little perv, you…

Actually, I think that is a condition known as ‘normal male adolescence.”

:-)

OMG, BOSCH!!!

Jay’s trying to start a race of Cylons!!!

Taxpayer

April 27th, 2009
3:58 pm

You may be thinking of the borg, Paul. They were the predecessors of the cylons.

AmVet

April 27th, 2009
4:00 pm

I understand they are also working on a spine transplant for use in this country. It’s name has not been finalized yet, but the working name is the GOP Gets a Backbone.

The target market will be for the Old White Guys in Dixie who can no longer stand up (get it?) to the pressures of living in a sun-centric solar system…

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
4:02 pm

Howdy everybody!! Been trying to reread some of the old blogs from last week cause I missed the last couple of days and WOW were these blogs HOT!!! I haven’t seen so many disguised curse words since my Uncle Jimmy visited when I was 11!! Hope to come on again when there’s another hot topic!! Can’t wait Jay!!

As for today’s topic……..I’m waiting on scientists to invent an artificial intelligence prototype that can be surgically implanted into Cheney’s head!! Imagine it!!….if he actually had to THINK before he opened his mouth………….. WOW!!

Ooops one last dig at Cheney…..since the Justice Dept. is thinking about inquiring into the “alleged” enhanced interrogation techniques, (torture); and there may be possible prosecution of guilty individuals, anyone noticed Cheney on Faux News dissing Obama lately? Methinks he got the message……”shut your trap or go down with the ship”!!

Later ya’ll

Bosch

April 27th, 2009
4:05 pm

Paul,

OMG!!!!! That’s one of the lessons we learned from Battlestar – we can commit technological suicide.

Actually this reminded me of that clip you posted months ago something to the effect of “Sony Invents Another Piece of Crap That Doesn’t Work.”

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:07 pm

Taxpayer

Actually, I wrote “Cyborg” first ’cause of those nifty little monocles they had. But Bosch and I have this Cylon thing… Caprica Six and all that…

Hi DebbieDoRight

I saw 60 Minutes last night. I think you mean Biden, not Cheney? (’before he opened his mouth’)

BTW – saw over the weekend that Spkr Pelosi and others top members of the Intel Committees were briefed on torture techniques over 30 times by CIA officials. This is going to be great entertainment! Again I gotta ask: couldn’t they see this coming?

“the silence on the question of accountability among a large majority of Democrats begs the question: were Democrats aware of the CIA’s “enhanced interrogation” program and are they refusing to call for a wide-ranging probe because it could show that they were complicit?

According to former CIA Director Michael Hayden and former Attorney General Michael Mukasey, the brutal interrogation methods, such as slamming a detainee’s head against the wall dozens of times and the use of waterboarding, “were disclosed repeatedly in more than 30 congressional briefings and hearings beginning in 2002, and open to all members of the Intelligence Committees of both Houses of Congress beginning in September 2006.”

“Any protestation of ignorance of those details, particularly by members of those committees, is pretense,” the former Bush officials wrote in an op-ed published in the Wall Street Journal Friday. Their op-ed sharply criticized the Obama administration’s decision to release the four Justice Department Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) memos.

They wrote “disclosure of the techniques is likely to be met by faux outrage, and is perfectly packaged for media consumption.” ”

Out for a bit while I look for the original op-ed -

Midori

April 27th, 2009
4:11 pm

Battlestar, Smattlestar!!

i’m all pumped in anticipation of the new Star Trek movie :)

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:13 pm

Midori

I’m just waiting for the new Spock to do his mind meld thing and say ‘aw nuts, the top of his head just came off!’ like he does it on Heroes!

Smattlestar?!!? A pox on you, treasonous fiend!

Bosch

April 27th, 2009
4:14 pm

Paul,

Remember how I said I kept typing “flue” instead of “flu” – nearly everytime I type Cylon – I first type “Cylong”

Yeah, just a bit of completely useless information for me to throw out there.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
4:18 pm

Hey Paul!! — reminder, Pelosi didn’t become the Speaker of the House until after the elections of 2006 and didn’t take the chair until the new congress convened in 2007. The “enhanced interrogation” techniques started WAY before she took over the top dog spot. I’ve been monitoring Faux News a lot lately, (just to hear what the other side thinks), and they harp on Pelosi knowing this and that a lot — however, they haven’t offered any proof that she was even in any of the meetings, only speculation; and then only speculation connecting to the fact that since she’s speaker of the house, she HAD to have been in the meetings. It seems that Faux News conveniently forgot recent historical facts. It must’ve been a Jedi Mind trick thing…….(Go Star Wars!!)

Redneck Convert

April 27th, 2009
4:19 pm

Well, my buddy Jim Earl is working on a little camera you can put into a vein with a needle and it will travel thru the body looking for disease. When you go to the Dr. he will just take it out and develop the film and see if you have anything. It will save a fortune on tests and probly put Sister Dusty out of work but she don’t do much anyway, seeing as how she blogs all the time when she’s at the lab.

And Jim Earl says we could put the things in prisoners so we can tell if they done anything when they get out and we can give them the Death Penalty without calling all kinds of witnesses. We could just show the film to the jury and they could see if certain Body Parts were working at a certain time of night.

Some of the people that drive on GA 400 might could use that little telescope Bookman writes about. They’re blind as a bat and can’t see a beer truck in front of them from 10 feet away.

Have a good night everybody and stay away from the pigs. They will give you the flu and you will wake up dead.

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:19 pm

Bosch

Useless?

Cylong

is a Cylon (Caprica Six) thong

perfectly reasonable subconscious manifestation on your keyboard typing….

Hillbilly Deluxe

April 27th, 2009
4:21 pm

Jay,

In my experience there is a trade-off between near vision and far vision. I didn’t see anything in the article about this. Do you know if it’s also true with this device or can you gain in one area without losing in another?

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
4:26 pm

Midori — I’m a Trekkie from WAY back, however I’m hoping against all hope that they didn’t screw up Star Wars for all time with this movie!!

I’m really looking forward to the new X-men movie, (Wolverine), Hugh Jackman is HOT!!! I hear there’s a nude scene, (semi nude — for some reason hollywood is scared to show men nude), and I’m waiting to see Hugh in the “buff”. :D

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:28 pm

Hi DebbieDoRight

My understanding is, Spkr Pelosi as Representative Pelosi was first briefed back in 2002. In fact, last week the consternation was, she’d earlier said she’d been briefed on what was GOING to happen (not shouting, just haven’t go the italics thing down) and excused herself because ‘they said they had these legal opinions that said it was okay.’ That was the briefing that referenced the infamous “are you sure it’s tough enough?” question.

Then at her last news conference she punched the air with her finger and said “In that or any other briefing…we were not, and I repeat, were not told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation techniques were used.” WERE used. Past tense. She was briefed on what was going to happen, then her denial said she wasn’t told what had happened.

THEN it came out, after the news conference, that, oops… there’d been a bunch of briefings.

I’d cynically thought early on that the Democrats looked at the issue round about the time of Abu Ghraib and thought “Great! This will sink Bush! We need to play it up for all it’s worth!” In other words, political outrage, not true moral outrage. Then it took on a life of its own and the Dems became the “We Don’t Torture, Republicans Do” party.

Now comes word of these briefings. We’ll still have to see how they play out and if the Dems come out with full disclosure. But with the way they’re trying to control any investigation, it sure looks like they have something to hide.

As I said: they couldn’t see this coming?!!?

Road Scholar

April 27th, 2009
4:30 pm

DDR: Who needs facts? Glenn Beck’s tears says it all…

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:38 pm

DebbieDoRight

Fox News? Google “top democrats briefed 30 times’ and the top hit is a story in the Washington Post dated April 23 – “Top Legislators Knew of Interrogations.”

“Between 2002 and 2006, the top Republicans and Democrats on the House and Senate intelligence committees “each got complete, benchmark briefings on the program,” said one of the intelligence sources who is familiar with the briefings.

“If Congress wanted to kill this program, all it had to do was withhold funding,”

Mike

April 27th, 2009
4:38 pm

Didn’t the Six-Million Dollar man have one of those?

Mike

April 27th, 2009
4:40 pm

DebbieDoRight –

“I’m really looking forward to the new X-men movie, (Wolverine),”

I saw the pirated version. As I kid who grew up on the X-Men in the early 80s I can tell you it is awesome.

Midori

April 27th, 2009
4:43 pm

Debbie,

Wolverine is definitely on my list, too :)

Midori

April 27th, 2009
4:46 pm

Mike,

thanks for the Wolverine tip.

Mike

April 27th, 2009
4:47 pm

Midori –

Grrrrrrr :)

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
4:47 pm

I’d cynically thought early on that the Democrats looked at the issue round about the time of Abu Ghraib and thought “Great! This will sink Bush! We need to play it up for all it’s worth!” In other words, political outrage, not true moral outrage.

Of course!! You’re not being cynical you’re being realistic!! Politicians are ……politicians!! They’re opportunists and some, (I truly don’t believe ALL), like to play to the crowd so to speak.

. But with the way they’re trying to control any investigation, it sure looks like they have something to hide.

The Justice Department has jurisdiction over this matter — I’m really interested to see how this will all play out……hopefully, (And this is Debbie being the optimist here), any investigation won’t clog up Congress and turn their eyes away from the immediate problems at hand.

As I said: they couldn’t see this coming?!!?

Vanity, thy name is Politician!!!

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:48 pm

DebbieDoRight

This is an associated item from that Washington Post story:

“Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday, refused to answer questions from Republicans about her advice to Mr. Obama on the publication of the interrogation memos.

“I’m not going to share that with you,” she told Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, California Republican. ”

OMG!! An official of the Obama Administration REFUSES to answer questions from Congress?

Sounds eerily like the Bush Administration, doesn’t it?

Or maybe the Executive Privilege claim is ‘different’ now, hmmm?

Dang, this is great entertainment!

Paul

April 27th, 2009
4:50 pm

DDR

I believe one reason Pres Obama wanted to avoid this is he thought it WOULD distract from his legislative agenda.

And the way the self-serving Democratic chairs said ‘we’re gonna hold our own investigations anyway” bore that out.

Kinda reads like a Greek tragedy, doesn’t it?

Mr. Snarky

April 27th, 2009
4:51 pm

In my day we didn’t some fancy dealymawhatsis if we couldn’t see…and we liked it. If you were having trouble seeing you just squinted real hard and asked your buddy to tell you what you were looking at.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
4:55 pm

DebbieDoRight Fox News? Google “top democrats briefed 30 times’ and the top hit is a story in the Washington Post dated April 23 – “Top Legislators Knew of Interrogations.”

Sure!! Hey, you gotta know what’s going on from all sides!!! I like to hear everyone’s ideas and opinions, it keeps me motivated to search for the truth!! Oh, and thanks for the tip, I’ll look up the article.

Mike: saw the pirated version. As I kid who grew up on the X-Men in the early 80s I can tell you it is awesome.

Yeah!! I heard about it!! I’m STILL a big X-Men fan and I STILL buy their comics!! I recently re-ordered the Marvel edition of the origins of Storm written by Eric Jerome Dickey; my other one was “accidentally” thrown away, (I’m still sore about that!). Hey, I’m proud to be a nerd and I’m playing hookey from class the day Wolverine comes out just so that I can see it early and avoid some of the long lines!!

Taxpayer

April 27th, 2009
4:58 pm

Paul,

Congress has to vote on things like not approving funding.

Paul

April 27th, 2009
5:07 pm

Taxpayer

I think that was the point – Congress could’ve excluded it. They do votes on classified program funding all the time.

IF this plays out as it’s shaping up, it’s gonna cause a lot of angst among a lot of people. Everything Spkr Pelosi and company said about Pres Bush… seems it would apply to them to, doesn’t it?

And that’s why you’re going to see a lot of stonewalling (we’ll do our own investigation, thank you) and misleading statements (did I say it hadn’t happened when the briefing said it was going to happen? Silly me!) and misdirection (well, sure I was briefed, but I couldn’t actually talk about it, you know… after all, it was classified!).

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
5:09 pm

OMG!! An official of the Obama Administration REFUSES to answer questions from Congress? Sounds eerily like the Bush Administration, doesn’t it?

Paul, legally they have no right to ask her anything…..YET. Right now, there isn’t any investigation ongoing concerning the torture memos. The Republican Senator who asked that question, was basically “playing” politics. The question wasn’t relevant to the hearing at hand, AND any remarks Mrs. Clinton would’ve made; would’ve been used as fodder for both the left and the right. Remember, Mrs. Clinton was a darn good lawyer, before she became SOS — she already knows her legal options.

Or maybe the Executive Privilege claim is ‘different’ now, hmmm?

You’re reaching Paul and you know it!! Nice try though :D

believe one reason Pres Obama wanted to avoid this is he thought it WOULD distract from his legislative agenda.

Right — and also the fact that it would probably be a detriment to the Office Of The President. Richard Nixon was enough of a stain on history, no one needs to know if Bush’s office was following in the footsteps of a megalomaniac. Greek tragedy for sure!

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
5:10 pm

Oh and Paul from 2002 until the elections of 2006; Republicans ruled Congress.

I Report/ You Whine

April 27th, 2009
5:13 pm

A jumbo jet being chased by a F-16 fighter jets buzzed Lower Manhattan this morning, panicking New Yorkers, many of whom were forced to evacuate their office buildings.

“It’s completely asinine after 9/11 to do that,” said Keith Mercantine, who witnessed the chaos in Jersey City. “I saw ambulances out here with pregnant women.”

The head of the White House Military Office apologized for the flight over New York.

“Had I known about it I would have called them right away and asked them not to,” he said. “The good news is it was nothing more than an ill considered, badly conceived, insensitive photo op – with the taxpayers’ money.”

Asinine, yep, that’s our little Obozo.

Seven of Nine

April 27th, 2009
5:13 pm

Oh great, now you perverts will be using these implants to ogle my smokin’ bod.

I Report/ You Whine

April 27th, 2009
5:16 pm

Evening Newscasts Have Covered Obama More Than Bush & Clinton Combined. Not only has Obama gotten more coverage, but that coverage has been more positive than his predecessors.

Obozo’s little army of toads.

eewww

Paul

April 27th, 2009
5:18 pm

DDR

I do not think there has to be an investigation. The article stated “Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, testifying before the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday, refused to answer questions from Republicans about her advice to Mr. Obama on the publication of the interrogation memos.”

The Congressman asked her what ADVICE she gave. She refused. That’s the same scenario during the Bush Administration. Remember all the Congressmen who wanted to question Rove and others about advice given? The Administration refused. It’s a separation of powers thing – yet when it happens with this Administration, there’s nary a peep of protest.

I’m typing as I’m reading: the only reason, as I understand it, for a member of the Executive to refuse to answer questions from the Legislative, is when Executive Privilege comes into play. A member of the Cabinet who says “Well, I’d really, really like to answer that but if I do you’ll just use it for fodder” won’t get far.

Your 5:10

I think that’s irrelevant. We are speaking of members of the Intel Committees. Couple of the Reps – see Graham – have made their objections known for a long time. If they would have referred programs for cuts, it would have happened.

But if it would have happened or not – Dems never even tried.

And that’s another mark against them.

Smiley

April 27th, 2009
5:21 pm

Its good to see what Debbie Do Right thinks of government power. If you say bad things about us on television we will threaten criminal prosecution. Debbie loves it. Wow! We should all be terrified of giving power to an ideology who is that hateful, that greedy for power. What penalty might await a dissenter?

Yet, we see that the liberals are full of such hatred. In fact they have become the party of hate and fear. As the power of unrestrained government power, they have no hesitation to use any government power for any reason that advances their agenda or protects their position. Ah there is the problem. In the beginning it’s about their agenda but it always becomes about their position.

Then the burnings begin.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
5:33 pm

The Congressman asked her what ADVICE she gave. She refused. That’s the same scenario during the Bush Administration. Remember all the Congressmen who wanted to question Rove and others about advice given? The Administration refused. It’s a separation of powers thing – yet when it happens with this Administration, there’s nary a peep of protest

Paul, no it’s not the same thing!! Example: You and your son are being sued by your son’s ex-employee for infringing on a patent that the ex-employee claims is his. While testifying in court, the attorney asks you, “Sir Paul, have you ever cheated on your wife”; his reference for asking this he tells the judge is that he wants to know if you’re trustworthy and honest. The Judge will rule against him because it has nothing to do with the proceedings at hand. Period. To ask a question that has nothing to do with the proceedings at hand is a “set up” question which was being used by the Senator as a “gotcha”. Clinton was too smart to fall into that trap.

Also, remember Bush’s people were subpoenaed to testify about their dealings in a particular case and REFUSED citing “Executive Privilege” (Cheney) — as I stated earlier, Clinton was before the committee on a entirely different matter. Don’t make this about anything else or try to connect it to the Bush shenanigans, it’s like peas and shoes, two totally different things.

I think that’s irrelevant. We are speaking of members of the Intel Committees. Couple of the Reps – see Graham – have made their objections known for a long time. If they would have referred programs for cuts, it would have happened. But if it would have happened or not – Dems never even tried.

Congress approves the Budgets — you know that!! How is the majority of congress being Republican and having more votes to push legislation through, (see Bush’s spending bills); irrelevant?

And that’s another mark against them.

Where are the marks against the Republicans? Have they been whitewashed all of sudden because a Dem is now in the White House? Those without sin and all……..

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
5:35 pm

Smiley: I usually make a comment to people who have an interesting point of view whether it differs from mine or not and are intellectually intriguing. In your case, this will be the last time I’ll address you. Kudos!

Taxpayer

April 27th, 2009
5:36 pm

Paul,

The Congressmen are not asked to vote on approval of interrogation techniques. Their culpability is not quite the same as the guy that decrees that waterboarding is not torture or the guy that says 1 waterboarding or 100 waterboardings — no difference. I mean, some of this side show stuff is the sort of thing that might make a Pelosi blush but she hardly approved the use of torture. I say, bring it on if that’s the game to be played and let the chips fall where they may.

Susan Myers

April 27th, 2009
5:47 pm

For all those who suffer from Macular Degeneration, this is extraordinary news.

http://www.macular.org/disease.html

Paul

April 27th, 2009
5:57 pm

DDR – Midori

I saw Hugh Jackman in Boy From Oz in Manhattan. Then was at the backstage door when he came out. Nice guy. Real personable. His wife with him – she’s one of those ‘cougars’!

DDR

Please don’t tell me the only time a member of the Executive has to answer a question while sitting in front of Congress is if the question is not directly related to the subject at hand…. All the opposition party does is gotcha stuff, for pete’s sake. Point is, every time a Bush official said ‘I don’t have to tell you” you would’ve thought the Republic was coming to an end.

So, if a particular committed subpoenad SecState Clinton and asked her to reveal what private advice she gave Pres Clinton, you’d support it?

I wouldn’t.

Your other point on the budget – it has to do with how classified programs are approved and funded. Main point is, Dems never, ever objected. Maybe Rep Harmon did. Yes, I think so. But she’s the exception. Dems didn’t try to shut it down, though withholding funding or any other means.

Your last point about marks against Republicans: Rule of Thumb: just cause Reps did something bad is no excuse for Dems doing something bad.

As far as this torture thing goes, Dems are looking about as dirty as Republicans.

Taxpayer

Spkr Pelosi says “I didn’t know. I wasn’t told. It was vague. It was in the future.”

Now it comes out, apparently if the Post is to be believed, that is not the case.

And to listen to her outrage, and other Democrats, you’d think they found out like the rest of America did. The CIA briefed on ‘benchmarks’ for goodness sake. Do you really think if the majority or minority head said “I don’t like this, not one bit. We’re going to hold closed hearings and I want to tell you what we’ll do next.”

Since when has Congress been shy about telling the Administration how to run things?

Obambi's TelePrompter

April 27th, 2009
6:01 pm

TP- I’m bored.

OBZ- Uh, me too.

TP- I know chief, let’s fly a 747 low over New York City, we can relive the blessed glory day of 9/11!!

OBZ- Yes, uh, plus we can panic, uh, all of the infidels and watch them run in, uh, terror, uh, I mean, uh, man made disaster.

TP- Can I be the pilot, can I be the pilot?!?

OBZ- Oh, ok. Hey, uh, I’ll make the, uh, infidel air force chase us, uh, and we’ll act like we defeated them!

TP- Cool!

OBZ- But, uh, first we, uh, have to shave our, uh, bodies.

TP- eewwww.

Allah Akbar!

Yes we can!

MWB

April 27th, 2009
6:04 pm

Paul at 5:57,

Big whoop-de-doo!

Hugh Jackman’s wife is not one of the cougars. You need to check before you post.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
6:08 pm

I saw Hugh Jackman in Boy From Oz in Manhattan. Then was at the backstage door when he came out. Nice guy. Real personable. His wife with him – she’s one of those ‘cougars’!

Sigh….he’s gorgeous!!! Too bad about the marriage thing though!! :lol:

Taxpayer

April 27th, 2009
6:12 pm

Paul,

And, still, you focus on Pelosi. You guys really do have some sort of secret meetings where you decide on a game plan, don’t you. Now, tell me again which memo has Pelosi’s signature on it and show me some videos that were not destroyed where she’s sitting in front of someone being actually tortured and she’s saying “How many times is that, only 100, do it again, until he reads this confession word for word…” You GOPers are a hoot. My wife and daughter have a little saying that they use whenever one of them wants to change the subject. One will say, “Ooh, look! A ducky!” That’s precisely what these so-called arguments about Pelosi and other such distractions remind me of.

Chief of staff, Central State

April 27th, 2009
6:13 pm

Suasn @ 5:47, does this medical breakthrough mean that FD will be able to see Moscow from Milledgeville? Gosh, that old Geezer is going to be
a top notch Republican when we’re done with him, the wisdom of Bush, paired with Palinesque vision——–FD 2012.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
6:19 pm

Paul, Taxpayer makes a valid point (at 5:36) concerning culpability. Again, I think we’re debating two different thing that you are trying to lump into one “basket” so to speak.

So, if a particular committed subpoenad SecState Clinton and asked her to reveal what private advice she gave Pres Clinton, you’d support it?

By law a spouse can not testify against their other half .

Your other point on the budget – it has to do with how classified programs are approved and funded. Main point is, Dems never, ever objected. Maybe Rep Harmon did. Yes, I think so. But she’s the exception. Dems didn’t try to shut it down, though withholding funding or any other means.

I would have to look up your assertion that dems didn’t try to shut down the torture. However, exactly HOW MANY dems really knew about it? You stated earlier that six people were originally briefed on the use of the memos detailing the new guidelines on torture; those six people were sworn to secrecy; so how could the other Dems in congress, (or republicans for that matter), know what their approval for war spending entailed?

Your last point about marks against Republicans: Rule of Thumb: just cause Reps did something bad is no excuse for Dems doing something bad.

True. But republicans should stop trying to rewrite history by hiding their hands that held the blade that stabbed Caesar.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
6:27 pm

RETRACTION: By law, a spouse is NOT COMPELLED, to testify against their other half.

I Report/ You Whine

April 27th, 2009
6:36 pm

RUSH: You mean you filled out President Obama’s form on the website –

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: — that was set up to help you deal with a housing problem that you had.

CALLER: Yes, sir.

RUSH: And then the next thing you knew you were being solicited by law firms throughout the country who wanted $2,700 to renegotiate your mortgage?

CALLER: Yes, sir.

Never mind Obozo sending leads to his ambulance chasing buddies, what happened to the 75 Billion?

Hmmmm?

Paul

April 27th, 2009
6:48 pm

DebbieDoRight

I had Clinton on my mind. I meant “If SecState Clinton were asked what advice she gave Pres Obama.”

I believe the earliest briefings were for senior members of the Intel Committees only. The later briefings, I understand some senior staffers were present. If that’s the case, I’m amazed it didn’t leak.

Taxpayer 6:12

I focus on Pelosi as she’s the Speaker. Rockefeller gets a bit long to spell. But Pelosi leads the charge against Bush & co. and has been the one to go against Pres Obama in calling for hearings and investigations.

The point is: she’s taken the stance of “I knew nothing.” Now it appears she… misspoke. That she was aware of what was happening for years. And that she knew it as a committee member of the committee that could have shut it down.

But she didn’t even try. Has just said, “I couldn’t really talk about it…”

That’s the salient point.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
7:28 pm

I had Clinton on my mind. I meant “If SecState Clinton were asked what advice she gave Pres Obama.”

Paul, I’m not up on the legality of the law as it pertains to the President and the SoS, however, any advice that Mrs. Clinton gave to Pres. Obama in an official capacity could be described as “privileged/sensitive” info — just as any advice given by the VP to the Pres could.

md

April 27th, 2009
7:50 pm

As for Pelosi:

She is a sitting member of Congress, with the duty of any congressperson to abide by principles, period.

How many democrats knew about it? How many does it take – one. If she was against troture of any kind, she had the duty to her constituients and to herself to sing from the rooftops, period.

And she was briefed because she was the ranking Democrat on the committtee at the time.

Its not about party, its about guilt. If you want to hang one, you have to hang them all. Same if you want to excuse one.

md

April 27th, 2009
7:56 pm

As for Clintons’ morals and prowess as an attorney. I believe most of us remember Whitewater very well.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
8:17 pm

MD — WHITEWATER!!?? The witch hunt? Come on!! They searched for years and spent MILLIONS of tax payer money and got …….NOTHING.

DebbieDoRight

April 27th, 2009
8:17 pm

Pelosi is a member of congress as is a lot of REPUBLICANS — what’s their excuse?

md

April 27th, 2009
8:51 pm

They don’t have one. Try reading the post. Hang them all or hang none. How hard is that.

You oviously look at this from behind the party curtain.

I find it interesting that all involved with Whitewater were found guilty – except the Clintons. And it sure didn’t take him long to pardon them, did it? Politicians are politicians – out for themselves.