No, David Gregory: torture is NOT debatable

Exhibit no. 177 proving that the mainstream corporate media are anything but liberal: yesterday the host of NBC's Meet the Press, David Gregory held an online chat, and my question was chosen for him to answer. I asked (timestamped at 2:11), "Why is debating torture a 'crucial debate to have?' How exactly does it go beyond 'torture is illegal?' "

And here's the response I got from torture-apologist, Cheney-fellator Gregory:

[Sinfonian], because it is too easy to dismiss all these techniques as "torture." Were all the techniques torture? The debate to have is how do we treat our enemies in a new threat environment and can you defeat an enemy like this without compromising the values of the country?

Can there be any more blatant indication that Gregory is in the tank for the Bush crime syndicate? The one incontrovertible fact that he and his buddies on the Right seem to miss is that TORTURE IS ILLEGAL. Period. And there can be no legitimate argument against the fact that, for example, waterboarding IS torture. Indeed, the outcry against waterboarding and sleep deprivation and the other "techniques" used isn't whether or not they constitute torture -- of course they do. The "debate" actually is whether or not torture is permissible, and if so under what circumstances.

So, Gregory gets the issue exactly wrong. And because not only is torture morally wrong, it is not permissible under American or international law, there quite simply can be NO debate. The very fact that Gregory and his peers in the MSM have created this faux-debate out of whole cloth should make clear to all but the most obtuse observers that our media have abdicated their responsibilities as journalists and have become, in the truest sense of the word, propagandists of the worst kind.

Incidentally, I asked Gregory one other question that didn't get selected: "Have you ever considered being a contestant on 'Dancing With the Stars?' " I'm sure Dancin' Dave would be a big hit, given his brilliant 2007 performance with his pal Karl Rove (Gregory is, appropriately, to Rove's right in the video):

Another great moment in journalism. I mean, "journalism."

Blast Off! Radio PRIMETIME: One lump or two?

NOTE SPECIAL TIME FOR TODAY'S SHOW: 7pm EASTERN

Last week I was just a sucky blogger with a webradio show. This week, I'm a sucky blogger with a webradio show and a video that got some air time on teevee. Really, not much difference.

And indeed, longtime listeners (both of you) will continue to enjoy all the same snark and all the same substance that you've come to dread expect from Blast Off! Radio. (Only difference is that once again, I must change the show's time today from its traditional 4pm slot to 7pm Eastern, due to my travel schedule. Thanks for understanding.)

Of course, we'll talk at some length about the Great Teabaggers' Balls (the events, I mean, not the anatomy), both specifically with regard to the video but also more generally: what kind of impact, if any, have the teabaggers had? Is it at all embarrassing to have drawn nationwide attendance significantly below that of, say, the Million Man March (and perhaps approaching that of three typical college football games)? And most importantly, have the teabaggers' scrotums healed yet? I hear the chafing can be a bitch ... maybe we can ask the Pensacola Republican Club president about that?

There has been other news as well, and we'll talk about that, too. How about the indictments of former Florida House speaker Ray Sansom (R-you surprised?) and Northwest Florida State College president Bob Richburg? Hey, Bob, if you lie down with pigs, better be ready to get dirty, know what I mean? We'll also discuss the latest torture revelations and try to figure out who thought that the 183rd waterboarding of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed would have any different results than the previous 182 times. And we'll make even more fun of Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R-Brylcreem), whose threats to have his state secede from the U.S. have made him and his hair even more of a laughingstock than before. (You want different presidents? Fine -- be my guest!)

As usual, your calls, chats, and emails make the show work, so please make plans to join me tonight at a special time, 7pm Eastern. Here are the deets for my peeps:

TIME: 7:00 pm Eastern TONIGHT

Click here to listen

Call in number: (646) 716-7543

E-mail: blastoffradio-at-gmail-dot-com

But if anyone calls and asks me, "What's Keith Olbermann really like?," I'm cutting your mic! I mean it!

Sen. Nelson responds regarding torture vote

I just introduced myself to Sen. Nelson and, after a little small talk about how, like him, my ex-wife is from Melbourne, I asked him why he voted with the Republicans in the Senate Intelligence Committee against a Whitehouse/Feinstein proposal to restrict the CIA's use of torture.

Sen. Nelson explained that the proposal would have limited the CIA to only the interrogation techniques prescribed by the Army Field Manual. However, said the Senator, the manual is designed to assist "20-year-old soldiers in the field" with on-the-spot interrogation, and he was unwilling (he said rather emphatically) to limit the CIA to such procedures. "It has nothing to do with torture," he said, "and everything to do with securing information."

I still don't agree with his decision, but I appreciate his candid response.

Bill Nelson votes for torture

Unbelievable. Unconscionable. And, at least for me, quite likely unforgivable.

Sen. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.), a conservative Democrat from Melbourne (which largely explains the conservatism -- trust me, I lived there), apparently gets off on torture:

The Senate Intelligence Committee on Thursday questioned the continuing value of the Central Intelligence Agency’s secret interrogation program for terrorism suspects, suggesting that international condemnation and the obstacles it has created to criminal prosecution may outweigh its worth in gathering information.

The committee rejected by one vote a Democratic proposal that would essentially have cut money for the program by banning harsh interrogation techniques except in dire emergencies, a committee report revealed.

[...]

But the committee stopped short of using its budget authority to shut down the program. In a closed session on May 23, two Democrats, Senators Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Dianne Feinstein of California, proposed barring spending on interrogation techniques that go beyond the Army Field Manual, which bans physical pressure or pain. Under their proposal, the only exception would have been when the president determined “that an individual has information about a specific and imminent threat.”

The amendment failed when Senator Bill Nelson, Democrat of Florida, joined all the Republicans in voting no.

So, let me get this straight. Whitehouse and Feinstein wanted to cut funding for CIA torture, but Nelson votes against his party and with all the Republics to say, essentially, that torture is cool.

This is absolutely appalling. I've supported Sen. Nelson and voted for him, despite the fact that I've known of his center-right proclivities for years, because it was important to me to have (and maintain) a Democratic majority in the Senate. (Of course, the fact that his opponent last year was Krazy Kitty Harris made my vote even more of a no-brainer.)

But this kind of vote leads me to believe that Sen. Nelson may have outserved his usefulness in the Senate. I trust that those of us with long memories -- and I include myself in that number -- will remember this vote (and others) in 2012, and we will seek a true progressive to be the Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate, regardless of whether or not Sen. Nelson opts to run for another term.

For shame, Sen. Nelson ... for shame.