Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

… riddled with inexplicable and elementary errors of law and fact

Eh, that’s media spin. biden’s health is fine and he’s doing a good job.

Thanks to your bullshit, we are now under siege.

“More of this”, i said to the dog.

If senate republicans had any shame, they’d die of it.

If you tweet it in all caps, that makes it true!

“Jesus paying for the sins of everyone is an insult to those who paid for their own sins.”

A snarling mass of vitriolic jackals

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

Bark louder, little dog.

Pessimism assures that nothing of any importance will change.

Too often we hand the biggest microphones to the cynics and the critics who delight in declaring failure.

When do we start airlifting the women and children out of Texas?

No offense, but this thread hasn’t been about you for quite a while.

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

Only Democrats have agency, apparently.

It’s always darkest before the other shoe drops.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

“But what about the lurkers?”

Technically true, but collectively nonsense

Whoever he was, that guy was nuts.

If you’re pissed about Biden’s speech, he was talking about you.

My years-long effort to drive family and friends away has really paid off this year.

Nothing worth doing is easy.

You are here: Home / Open Threads / Excellent Links / Interesting Read

Interesting Read

by | 6 Comments

This post is in: 

Mark Kleiman discusses his views on torture:

A reader writes to ask if I’m really certain that torture never produces true and valuable information.

Of course not. Indeed, I’m sure that the opposite is true. It would be astonishing if torture were nevereffective.

But the fact that torture is often not merely unproductive but counterproductive, and that the instances were it would be beneficial are so hard to pick out from the rest, makes a strong pragmatic case against it to go along with the absolutist moral case against it.

Read the whole thing.

Reader Interactions

6Comments

  1. 1.

    Steve

    The position that “it’s a good thing to torture a thousand terrorists to death if we get intelligence to prevent one act of violence” isn’t just a crazy fringe thing, unfortunately. It seems to be the majority position at RedState, a site where John still thinks he can find principled conservatives for some reason.

    Mind you, if we really knew everyone we had in custody was a terrorist or otherwise a Bad Guy [tm], I’m not sure I would shed a lot of tears for whatever happens to them. But as Jon Stewart (or maybe it was his buddy Colbert) said last night, if we really have such a great method of determining who’s evil with 100% certainty, we should start using it over here, and get rid of all those useless judges!

    I find the argument to be unwinnable. They used to tell me “it’s ok if we torture people at Gitmo, because they’re all a bunch of terrorists.” Then when I pointed out that we released a bunch of them who weren’t terrorists, they responded, “well, that just proves we’re only keeping the guilty ones!” Can’t win.

  2. 2.

    Zach

    I thought this line was also spot on:

    Isn’t it extraordinary how it’s the people who reject moral relativism and insist on the black-and-white difference between good and evil who argue for making exceptions when it comes to torture?

  4. 4.

    Steve

    There is nothing inconsistent between the good-vs-evil distinction and the conservative position on torture. By definition, good is what we do, and evil is what the other guys do. Only treasonous liberals accuse our guys of doing anything evil.

Comments are closed.