Bush remains convinced (the one thing he excels at) that Michael Mukasey is a reasonable candidate for Attorney General despite the public response to Mukasey’s statement that he’s not sure if water-boarding is torture or legal.
How is it the rest of us, those who aren’t up for the job, know that even if water-boarding sounds like an activity at Club Med, it was used during The Spanish Inquisition, by Pol Pot's genocidal Khmer Rouge and during World War II by Japanese soldiers against civilian detainees and U.S. military POWs, leading to their later being prosecuted for it by U.S. military tribunals?
Prior to the B.C. (Bush/Cheney) era, the U.S. government and courts took the position, along with the rest of the civilized world, that water-boarding is torture. Could is be we’ve found kinder, gentler ways of water-boarding? Maybe we've learned something from painless dentistry.
One of the issues, according to Mukasey, is it depends who's doing the water-boarding, his thesis being there are good and bad practitioners. I propose we get a master water-boarder, someone who’s not burned out, maybe a Democrat, to hold him underwater until he gurgles up a clearer position. With an adept person holding his head in the tank, that wouldn’t be torture, just part of the interviewing process.
Bush protested that the media's criticism of his nominee was "unfair". Interesting from someone who's never called torture "unfair".