Just a Reminder on Torture: Dick Cheney is a Liar

It's one thing, from your office of Vice President, to make an unprecedented grab for Executive Power. It's another to lie blatantly about your efforts.



Dick Cheney to ABC News, 15 December 2008:

On the question of so-called "torture", we don't do torture, we never have. It's not something that this administration subscribes to. Again, we proceeded very cautiously; we checked, we had the Justice Department issue the requisite opinions in order to know where the bright lines were that you could not cross. The professionals involved in that program were very, very cautious, very careful, wouldn't do anything without making certain it was authorized and that it was legal. And any suggestion to the contrary is just wrong.

Senate Armed Services Committee Inquiry into the Treatment of Detainees in US Custody, December 2008:

The Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) interrogation program included at least one SERE* training technique, waterboarding. Senior Administration lawyers, including Alberto Gonzales, Counsel to the President, and David Addington, Counsel to the Vice President, were consulted on the development of legal analysis of CIA interrogation techniques. Legal opinions subsequently issued by the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) interpreted legal obligations under U.S. anti-torture laws and determined the legality of CIA interrogation techniques. Those OLC opinions distorted the meaning and intent of anti-torture laws, rationalized the abuse of detainees in U.S. custody and influenced Department of Defense determinations as to what interrogation techniques were legal for use during interrogations conducted by U.S. military personnel.

*SERE stands for Survival Evasion Resistance and Escape training, exposing US forces to techniques “based on illegal exploitation (under the rules listed in the 1949 Geneva Convention Relative to the Treatment of Prisoners of War) of prisoners over the last 50 years”.

Comment of the Day: Degenerate Secular Liberal Jihadist Terrorism in Alaska

Gerald Warner in The Daily Telegraph:

If - and it is still a big if - arson was committed by militant homosexuals or liberals simply driven by hatred of Palin, then that is a phenomenon that should greatly concern the American public. Anti-Christian jihadism fuelled by secularism is as unacceptable as that driven by militant Islam. If Wasilla Church was burned by arsonists making an ideological point, that is terrorism....

If what is suspected turns out to be true, the burning of Wasilla Bible Church is a metaphor for the onslaught against Christianity that aggressive secularism has mounted in Europe and which, under the influence of the morally degenerate Democrat Party, is now invading the United States. This may be a significant warning to complacent Christians.

A Farewell Song for George Bush: "Virgil Caine is My Name"

As President Bush trots round the world on his extended farewell, Enduring America is honoured to launch a competition to find the appropriate song to say Good-bye to the 43rd President.

Our first entrant comes from long ago, in the days when George was still raisin' hell rather than creating it.

[youtube]http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=38JpAMG65Dg&feature=related[/youtube]

See all the Farewell Song contest entrants

Scientific Update: How Can There Be Non-Conservatives?

Conservapedia continues to amaze us with the rapid development of its special section, "Why do Non-Conservatives Exist?". We're especially impressed with the "scientific" calculations now defining the reasons for liberal deviance.

It's heartening, for example, to see that colleagues and I are responsible for "20% [who] refuse to let go of their...desire for a sense of acceptance by liberal friends or teachers", but I'm personally encouraged by "20% who] refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, to act in a way that conflicts with conservative values, such as irresponsible sexual promiscuity".

Of course, I have asked Mike Dunn to set up our own Enduring America poll to support Conservapedia's findings.



Those Scientific Findings in Full

40%: did not hear about conservative principles and the logic behind them until after they made up their mind, perhaps due to pervasive societal bias, and refuse to reconsider

20%: refuse to rise above their personal temptations, often self-destructive, to act in a way that conflicts with conservative values, such as irresponsible sexual promiscuity

20%: refuse to let go of their past, or let go of their desire for a sense of acceptance by liberal friends or teachers

10%: work in a job having a salary dependent on keeping conservatives out of power, such as public school teachers, and refuse to rise above self-interest

5%: were told off or disciplined once by a conservative, often a parent, and refuse to rise above the animosity.

5%: like an anarchist, genuinely want to believe in and propagate destructive ideas.

Why We Love Conservapedia: How Can There Be Non-Conservatives?

Our favourite on-line encyclopedia, still reeling in disbelief at the election of Barack Obama ("an apparent Muslim, Obama could use the Koran when he is sworn into office"), has started a special section, "Why Do Non-Conservatives Exist?" Answers include the contribution of Conservapedia founder and son of the legendary feminist-basher Phyllis Schlafly, Andrew Schlafly, "Self-destructive or contrarian behavior; some choose to do what is irrational."

So far there are 18 reasons, but I'm certain Enduring America readers can make valuable additions to the list. (Indeed, I took the liberty of slipping in my own contribution, which sparked an inadvertently comic discussion amongst the Conservapedia moderators.)



Conservative principles are based on reason. So why do non-conservatives still exist? Here are some reasons:

1. They made up their mind before hearing conservative principles, and will not reconsider their views.


2. They have something criticized by conservatives in their personal background, and feel compelled to defend it rather than let it go.


3. They pride themselves on doing well in school or reading the newspaper, can't accept that what they were taught was incorrect or biased.


4. They have liberal friends, and want their approval or acceptance.


5. Their job and salary, such as working for public schools, depends on keeping conservatives out of power.


6. They knew a conservative whom they dislike for some random reason.


7. They have trouble understanding some of the slightly abstract concepts in conservatism, such as "more guns, less crime," and "less taxes, more revenue."


8. They are more comfortable discussing simple issues like race and poverty than complex issues like globalism.


9. Media bias acts to caricature conservatism, making it seem unpalatable, conditioning people to reject its teachings.


10. Schools reward politically correct, liberal answers on tests.


11. Unthinking rebellion against conservative parents.


12. Impressionable individuals buying into Bush derangement syndrome, and reacting with emotion rather than reason.


13. A desire for large government inculcated by personal weakness and reluctance to take personal responsibility.


14. A disproportionate focus on biblical passages that appear to support liberal positions, eg the adulteress story, the disciples holding everything in common, etc.


15. An admiration for historical figures whom liberals claim were liberals.


16. Self-destructive or contrarian behavior; some choose to do what is irrational.


17. Mind-altering drugs.


18. Charismatic leaders trading on image, rather than experience, can dupe the unsuspecting.