The very existence of a waterboarding 'debate' means this battle will be long

[IDemo]

The FauxFreeps™ in the media and in congress have been gleefully holding up the waterboarding issue as if a genuine debate exists over whether it is torture; whether it is legal; whether it is effective; and whether Democrats even truly object.

In precisely the same manner many on the right would have their beloved 26 Percenters think an actual debate exists over the veracity of man-caused climate change or the Theory of Evolution, they have been successful in manufacturing the essence of a public torture debate using their amoral, tortured logic (pun intended). The fact that such a contrivance even exists like torture as a subject which must be weighed carefully on its merits before it can be judged right or wrong means that many will believe it has its positive points, by default.

This is nothing less than moral and intellectual bankruptcy, posing as a culture and a system of government.

[L. Coyote]

1. It means the Bush Junta committed war crimes, and some want to give them a free pass!

There is no "genuine debate" as you say, just an effort to salvage the Junta.

This is so over already. They are all rushing to spin who isn't guilty.

[IDemo]

2. It's not "so over" so easily

When you have Cliff May on the Abrams Report arguing vehemently against the illegalization of waterboarding before "the facts are known" (they are well known, Cliff: it's torture, and illegal), and a US Attorney General nominee who refused to state plainly whether or not he views water boarding as torture and prohibited by law, the debate is on, phony or not.

May belittles the anti-torture crowd: "At the other extreme is the antiwar Left: They wouldn’t harm a hair on 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed’s head to save Disneyland at Christmas." Ridiculous rhetoric, in the same vein as suggesting "some would have offered the 9/11 hijackers therapy" (Cheney or Rove, if I remember).

Just today, a Senator (Kit Bond) said of waterboarding: "It's like swimming, freestyle, backstroke."

[Berry Cool]

3. They win so long as they can continue to successfully frame this as a "debate."

Just as is the case with everything else.

It really is morally and intellectually bankrupt, absolutely. It makes us no better than that we claim to despise. We're just living under a different flag.

[Occulus]

4. It's because the corporate media has convonced most of the public

that there are always two sides to every story.

BULLSHIT! Sometimes, there is a right side, and a WRONG side. Sometimes, there is a true side, and a FALSE side.

The media has everyone convinced that both sides of the story carry equal weight, regardless of the truth of each side. That's how they get away with it- because "there are two sides to every story".

I've seen that right here on DU, even on topics where there is a very clear right and wrong position.

[IDemo]

5. kgfnally nails it

The infotainment industry cares about selling advertising and staying within the good graces of the corporacratic power structure in charge, not disseminating the truth. Cultivating false dilemmas is part of the formula for entertaining, if irrelevant, 'news' programming.

[EFerrari]

6. Well said. There is no "right side" to torture.

That we can even entertain a "debate" on this issue should be a big red flag.

[Mr_Jefferson_24]

7. Amazing isn't it...

...how far we have fallen. When we should be talking about education, health care, environment, and infrastructure (all of which have been budgetarily stripped bare), we instead debate whether or not to continue the practice of torture -- incredible.