Where is it written in law that waterboarding is torture not to be used?

It isn't.

Clearly Obama has never seen Terminator 2 or he wouldn't be messing with the Governator.

Austin - yeah, they did (21 October 1994)with reservations which were clearly broken by our actions.

Donna - nice, revenge and "they are worse"...clearly, laws were meant to be broken for only the "right" reasons and the "bad" people. Good luck with that approach.

Joyce - again, if the president does it then it's not illegal? that's what you're saying. Why was nixon pardoned again? You're excusing law breaking in the name of power and expediency. How very facist of you.

but the sad part is this is modern-day America under the boot of socialist thugs. Ooops, make that "national-socialist thugs."

BTW--Dear Mark, the US DOJ has defined torture as having to watch Keith Olbermann on MSNBC for more than two commercial breaks. Details are becoming available as they break....

The taxpayers need union representation. Unions seem to get what they want. If not in a union, your cheese is in the wind these days.

If a President (any) asks their advisers, in this case lawyers, to write up an opinion and then takes action on that opinion, why should the writers take the heat?

We have to let the President have advisers and the advisers have to be free to state their opinions.

This attacking after the fact crap is just slowing us down.

If NOW we say no more waterboarding (which would be stupid) then fine, no more waterboarding FROM HERE ON OUT. But ya can't go back and prosecute. Torture has never been "clearly" defined. It's just been "opined" upon LOL! sorry couldn't help myself there

Arnold needs to set up a face to face meeting to "work out their differences" with our dear president. Then he needs to grab Obama by the sack and lift it up over his forehead - Bill Cosby, Himself, style...

If the people in the US would do this one simple thing, it would cripple the effort of the gov't to spend spend spend. Don't let any taxes be taken out of your paycheck-stop giving the gov't an interest free loan. If you get a return at end of year,have your witholding adjusted so that you break even at end of year.Gov't might have to actually do what we do-don't put on credit what you can't pay for with your paycheck!!If you don't have the money, then you should not spend.

I did not mean to go anonymous there.
No one is immune to abusing power. This is why our founders tried to keep power away from a central point.

I work in HR and spend a lot of time watching the Employee Free Choice Act. My employer is exceptionally generous with salaries, benefits, and working conditions. Yet many of the employees feel victimized and have occasional rumblings of starting a union.

One nanosecond after EFCA is signed my staff will unionize - and I'll be forced to negotiate and administer a contract. If my employees later decide to complain, then the government will foce me to pay higher wages.

Its all over.
Checkmate.

yeah, you're right. Regan was just showboating with that whole UN thing. He was an actor, after all.

The rest of the world is watching. When they see that our tyrant president and our corrupt government disregards contracts and the laws that govern them, then other countries will not do business with us because there is nothing to prevent the tyrant from voiding the contract.
Same thing that is happening with Chavez.

yes, let's. She's shares blame if she was aware of this and did nothing.

torture is clearly defined. It was redefined by the previous administration.

As I said, if you espouse the notion of the rule of law and abiding by agreements made, then you should be all for an open investigation.

Or, you believe that as long as a lawyer tells you it's legal, it is.

which is it?

Great reply to Mark's statement. Right to the point. He will now take his toys and go home crying. Lets hope he doesn't return. Then again it's al-ways fun to beat-up a leftist.

As soon as we can all agree on what is torture and what is enhanced interrogation techniques. Ask Nancy.

I have always thought Lincon was one of our worst presidents in History.

What is the functional relationship between the Service Employees International Union and ACORN? We know Local 100 of the SEIU and ACORN were founded and organized by the same guy, Wade Rathke. We know SEIU gets to change 2008 voting procedures in Las Vegas and interfere with other labor contracts. We also know ACORN lobbies for and gets Federal funding to enhance its activities. As taxpayers, just what are we funding here? That's what we DON'T know.

Until States start telling the Federal Govt to keep their dirty money, the states will always be under the thumb of the federal govt.
I am a firm believer in holding our constitution up, but states cannot whine about their "rights" and then turn around and take the ill-gotten dollars of the Federal Govt.
It is a two way street. States are just as guilty as the Feds.

...is that the economic problems are really not that bad. If Obama has time to squabble like this. Just as Bush's wallstreet bailout bill was not about a bailout or helping the economy or the (anti-American Patriot act about protecting America) but rather handing over more control to the federal reserve and selling fear in order to expand the federal government. Obama is full it and is doing the same nonsense, trying to convince people of economic threats(that they are worse than they actually are), then he goes and does rubbish like this all while his policies worsen the situation and his real intention is simply to grab more power for himself and the unions. Probably about 80 to 90 percent of what we see this administration and the last doing has more to do with expanding the power of government alone rather than making America a better nation by ahering to the constitution. Americans are being set up...for what ? I don't know. Americans are a good and generous people when not mislead and they do not deserve this oppresive treatment by Chairman Teleprompter.

I thought everyone was supposed to make a sacrifice...

Now you are suggesting that unions == the people? You really are stupid, aren't you?

This may be difficult for your limited intellect to comprehend, Copyleft, but most of us neither want to be ruled by unions nor corporations. In fact, we do not want the rule of men at all; we desire the rule of law. Law which treats everyone equally and impartially, and which applies to the highest and the lowest of society. Ideally, politicians should be stewards of the law, ensuring that it remain as unobtrusive as possible while protecting the public good.

Got that? Here we have a duly signed and negotiated settlement. The law suggests that contracts, freely entered into, ought to be enforced unless exceptional circumstances make it impossible (this is why Chapter 11 is necessary, for example). The law suggests that contracts should *not* be voided because the Federal Government wants to play favorites. By the way, though you also don't understand this, this is why the action to protect the unions in the Chrysler dissolution are also wrong; the rule of law suggests that secured creditors are entitled to the money before unsecured creditors, even when those unsecured creditors are rich and politically connected unions.

Come back, Copyleft, when you become a thinking person. Until then, stop trolling.

Here is the States Rights and sovereignty question again. Didn't this evolve into a shooting war in the 1860's even though the issue was never settled legally?

Texas and Montana are starting to assert their rights as States as well, Montana with not registering firearms or ammo manufactured in Montana and Texas by taking actual votes in their legislature whether or not to secede. I told my kids that either their kids or my kids grandkids will have to face the secession issue again.

California should tell Obama to take a hike and get his nose where it doesn't belong.