Every once in a while I scan the advice columns for a little view into humanity. It’s interesting to see what folks are struggling with and especially interesting to see how advice columnists respond.
More than every once in a while I come across something that seems to encapsulate where our crazy culture is in its thinking about relationships.
Lawmakers and rights groups on Wednesday blasted the US government’s tactics in the “war on terror” saying a 2003 legal memo had given the military a green light to use torture in interrogations.
The Justice Department memo, dated March 14, 2003 and released on Wednesday, was sent to the Pentagon as it struggled to set guidelines for interrogators.
The Justice department has released the full text of the infamous 2003 “torture memo” dismissively brushing aside the legal restraints on military interrogators. The torture part of the memo — and cruel, degrading and humiliating treatment whether dressed up as “enhanced” or “aggressive” interrogation is still torture — is alarming enough but what is really chilling is the legal underpinning.
There is a temptation as we grow old to condemn everything new as a sign of anti-progress. In wise maturity, perhaps we should guard against this tendency — but that would spoil the fun.
Sports metaphors get used a lot in politics, but there are some key differences between the two endeavors. The biggest is that in sports they keep score.
For example, you’ll never hear a football coach explain after his team is outscored by seven touchdowns that they really won the game, but this fact isn’t being reported by the liberal media.
The Pentagon made public a now-defunct legal memo that approved the use of harsh interrogation techniques against terror suspects, saying that President Bush’s wartime authority trumps any international ban on torture.
The military is using the FBI to skirt legal restrictions on domestic surveillance to obtain private records of Americans’ Internet service providers, financial institutions and telephone companies, the ACLU said Tuesday.
Gleaming white against the black night sky just beyond the outfield fence, the Capitol dome looms as a reminder that Washington’s new ballpark is not just spectacular, but also a national monument of sorts.
Treasury secretary Henry Paulson was right about one thing when he introduced his sweeping 218-page overhaul of our financial regulatory system: The midst of a financial crisis is no time to do it.
Paulson and the White House seem resigned to the prospect that if broad reforms are to be enacted, it will be the next president and the next Congress who will do so.
The Treasury department’s elaborate plan to restructure the regulation of the nation’s financial markets has the same chance of becoming reality as any other major Bush administration initiative during the next nine months — none.