Oh I recognize the posturing going on in the Senate this week. The same politics as usual I just criticized in my immediate past post is rearing it's ugly butt in the confirmation hearings for Michael Mulkasey. Senators who refused to make waterboarding illegal themselves in previous votes will now deny confirmation to a potential Attorney General who refuses to rule on the issue before he is even confirmed.
Anyone who thinks this debate is actually about waterboarding is a fool. It's all about defeating George Bush.
So that is not the question I'm asking. I'm just wondering if we would allow anyone to become the Commander in Chief who we thought wouldn't interrogate a terrorist up to the legal limits under certain situations?
If New York is ever attacked again, would we ever forgive a President who knowingly failed to take every action necessary to prevent the attack?
Every Democrat Senator running for President has ANNOUNCED he and she will VOTE AGAINST the confirmation of Mulkasey over the waterboarding issue. But this is the primary season.
What will they do when they are elected President? Will Senator Clinton AUTHORIZE harsh interrogation? We she fight for the same kinds and levels of "Executive Authority" that Bush has claimed? My bet is that she will. And so would Barack Obama. And so would John McCain.
I'm not saying these aren't tough questions. Or that any President wouldn't agonize over these issues.
But I predict that without exception, every single Presidential candidate running today,if elected, will absolutely authorize waterboarding and similar techniques once they are elected. No exceptions regardless of their politically motivated vote in the Mulkasey confirmation.
And therein lies the similarity between Don Imus and waterboarding. All these candidates and 74.275% of the known universe roundly condemned Don Imus during the Rutger's Basketball "nappy headed ho" flap. But now Imus is coming back. While the top tier candidates may avoid an actual appearance on his program "for a while," look for every campaign to have arm's length supporters appear on Imus and curry his favor and shill for the votes of Imus' legion of fans.
It was Politically Correct to criticize Imus during the Rutger's scandal. Imus became a sacrificial lamb in a culture rampant with racial and sexual stereotyping.
But in reality Imus has been sorely missed. It turns out there is no substitute in political analysis and in-depth interviews. And every candidate is pleased if not absolutely thrilled to have him back.
"The Rutgers controversy made Imus the object of vitriol from liberal leaders such as Sen. Hillary Clinton and the Rev. Al Sharpton. Clinton even referred to Imus as "Satan" - and called his remarks "small-minded bigotry."
Imus is just like waterboarding, they'll condemn him now, but they'll use him later.