"We tortured some folks" is right up there with . . .

[markpkessinger]

. . . the infamous, "Mistakes were made," as a rhetorical distancing device.

[grasswire]

1. or "who could have imagined...." nt

[hifiguy]

2. Indeed.

The faux "folksiness" of it makes it doubly vomit-worthy.

And I voted for this man, TWICE.

[Mira]

4. You said what I felt

and could not put words to.

[sharp_stick]

5. Yeah I know

It must hurt so much to know you voted for a guy that used a stupid phrase. How can you live with yourself?

[markpkessinger]

9. A 'stupid phrase?'

Followed by an admonishment not to be too sanctimonious about it? Seriously?

[nichomachus]

30. He chooses his words very carefully -- he is a lawyer.

[daleanime]

33. And that....

is part of why it's so upsetting.

[nichomachus]

35. Exactly. This wasn't misspeaking.

[sabrina 1]

44. Here's the real question you should be asking. 'How can ANYONE

condone or minimize the torture of other human beings and live with themselves?

And torturers are not patriots, unless you live in a dictatorship in some third world country.

[heaven05]

48. yeah, he knew

and he is still a better POTUS than the assholes that created this bloody mess. Please, proceed, hate on. I'm still glad I voted TWICE for him and would do it again if I could....

[RiverLover]

14. x2 The Great Pretender.

Still has to be better than Romney though.

[hifiguy]

18. It's come to that.

What we thought we were getting in 2008 can now be accurately described as "well at least he's better than Mittwit."

And he's gonna give us more deregulation of the banksters, it appears. The Long Con is now completely out in the open.

[markpkessinger]

59. I've been saying for several years now . . .

. . . in response to those who have argued that "at least he's better than <insert Republican of choice>," that that is setting the bar very, very low. I guess we're seeing just how low it really is.

[sharp_stick]

3. Well it would have been

if he was the one in charge of "torturing those folks".

As it is, it was just a stupid comment. If he had of used "tortured some poor unfortunate souls" it would have changed nothing.

[markpkessinger]

6. How about . . . .

. . . "We tortured detainees in violation of both international and domestic law, and against all standards of human decency. I have therefore instructed Attorney General Holder to investigate and prosecute these crimes to the fullest extent of the law."

Instead, he uses an outrageously folksy characterization of what was done, followed by an admonishment that we shouldn't be "too sanctimonious" about it.

Also, in this particular case, the distancing wasn't necessarily his own, but rather the nation's as a whole. Still indefensible.

But hey, we gotta "look forward," right?

[wavesofeuphoria]

7. exactly!!

[hifiguy]

8. You hit the bull's eye, sir.

I would applaud this. But it will happen shortly after the heat death of the universe.

[deutsey]

10. Bingo

[enough]

12. Thank you for this comment and the OP. (nt)

[sharp_stick]

13. There was already an investigation

and they decided not to prosecute. I'm sure the Justice Department already had all the information and more than the Senate report put out. How could you expect them to redo it now?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/08/24/AR2009082401743.html?hpid=topnews

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/durham-torture-cia-obama-holder

We'll never really know why the Justice Department cleared the investigation because the CIA has the ability to classify pretty much any document they want so no actual results will ever be published.

Personally, I think the reason there were never any prosecutions is that it was to politically dangerous. It would take more than just the President and Attorney General to actually go after these scumbags. You'd need a willing Congress and an actually impartial Supreme Court along with a bunch of investigators and prosecutors willing to hang their careers on it.

I never expected any prosecutions, I did however expect some reforms at the CIA and I've been sadly disappointed in that respect. When we had control of Congress we had a very short window to actually make some concrete changes in that organization and even though there have been some reforms they haven't come anywhere near the vast overhaul they need.

[markpkessinger]

16. The decision not to prosecute . . .

. . . was fore-ordained with the statement by the President, right after he was elected, that he wanted to "look forward, not backwards."

[sharp_stick]

19. You're probably right

There were never going to be prosecutions.

[RiverLover]

20. ..."right -after- he was elected." So much we learned right after, but not before. nt

[hifiguy]

29. Just as we eventually learned that he told the banksters

that he was there to "save" them.

I repeat, the Long Con is at last out in the open.

[RiverLover]

32. "The Long Con is out in the open now"--undeniably true!!

And its much more eloquent than my "Punk of the Century".

He got a nation SO wound up & READY for 'Change We Cam Believe In', and got people who never voted before to vote, and then he turned on us immediately after moving to DC and showed there was nothing to believe in after all.

No one will ever believe another candidate when they say they want change. Not completely. Once burned, twice shy. He took away the Hope that he espoused...

Its tragic.

[hifiguy]

34. I realized that we, as an electorate, had been had

the moment the Geithner and HRC appointments were announced. The cat was forever out of the bag from that moment on. Geithner in particular. Putting the head of the foxes in charge of the chicken coop was a dead giveaway that the public was gonna get screwed and big time. At that moment I knew that I had been sold a bill of goods, and I had never felt as good about a presidential vote.

"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." Pete Townshend.

[RiverLover]

60. This was my exact same experience as well. nt

[RiverLover]

17. Rec!

[WilliamPitt]

21. Thread win.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. And that's it said well

nt

[Dragonfli]

23. Folks with a limited capacity for morality as well as empathy

Appear to consider war crimes and torture to be on the same level as parking tickets or rude behavior, things to "get over" as they are just "things folks do sometimes". Such folks feel we shouldn't be disgusted by, outraged over, or sanctimonious about such mistakes when they are made by some other folks, after all, sometimes even patriots do such things.

Those that worship folks with those limited capacities because of their office, or their dreamy smile simply don't understand why those of us that are fully functioning human beings with a normal capacity for morality and empathy may consider war crimes and torture heinous offenses that should be punished as the prosecutable international crimes that they in fact are.

They think we are making a big deal out of nothing, they have fallen to amorality.

[KingCharlemagne]

24. Bravo! Hear, hear! - nt

[Owl]

26. Exactly!

[woo me with science]

27. Thank you.

It has been so long since we have seen an example of moral and ethical integrity in the White House, that people have forgotten what it is supposed to look like.

[nichomachus]

31. Yeah, but since we're still torturing people . . . .

[jtuck004]

39. But when you are playing your part in a cover-up, you have to be careful what you say. n/t

[Oilwellian]

40. Indeed

kick

[PowerToThePeople]

43. durec

[liberal_at_heart]

51. The Obama administration has made it no secret he is not that fond of liberals. I have to wonder

if that too sanctimonious line was a direct dig at liberals.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

65. K&R

[Fred Sanders]

38. Unfortunate turns of phrase are jumped on by malicious minded cons and trolls...et tu, "liberals"?

[markpkessinger]

50. I could dismiss it as an "unfortunate turn of phrase" IF ....

... it had not been followed by a lecture telling us not to be "too sanctimonious" about it!

[Fred Sanders]

53. What "lecture" was that? By calling whatever speech that was a lecture, are you not being the judgmental

one? And what is wrong with a good lecture?

The "you did not build that" turn of phrase was twisted by the cons and became their whole fucking Presidential campaign theme, you are doing the same thing.

[markpkessinger]

55. Call it a lecture, call it an admonishment, call it whatever you will ...

... Announcing to the public that "we tortured some folks" and then immediately telling us not to be "sanctimonious" about it -- you're goddamned right I'm judging that!

[GeorgeGist]

66. It was entirely deliberate.

Smart folks notice BS.

[sabrina 1]

45. Leaders don't make stupid comments. They make comments calculated

to appease someone or another when they are commenting on WAR CRIMES.

Unless it's George Bush of course, who could never, ever be compared to Obama when it comes to intellect.

I believe Bush called torture 'a mistake'. I don't recall trying to excuse that attempt to minimize a War Crime.

[iscooterliberally]

11. I know, right?

It makes it sound like they were subjected to bad cooking, or a really boring power point presentation. Not prosecuting the torturers undermines the rule of law. I guess we really aren't a nation of laws anymore when some agencies are above the law. Yeah we were all really upset after 9/11, but we are supposed to be the good guys, and the good guys don't 'torture folks'. I guess every villain is the hero of their own narrative. I hope that we eventually do the right thing and bring charges against those responsible. They used tragedy to act out their sick sadistic fantasies and tried to tell us they were getting useful information.

[Dragonfli]

25. "Not prosecuting the torturers undermines the rule of law."

"I guess we really aren't a nation of laws anymore when some agencies are above the law."

It's not just some agencies, but also some politicians and other individuals(contractors) as well as a whole class of bankers and hedge fund managers that are completely above the law these days.

[iscooterliberally]

68. I agree that it's not just agencies and see your point.

I remember the case of 'affluenza' for one, and then there's the guy that I made my screen name after, I Lewis Scooter Libby. If you have enough money, and/or power you can get out of anything. I was focused on the CIA when I put up my post. Thanks for the link to your post. I'm sorry I missed it back when you first put it up.

[Dragonfli]

71. I thought you might enjoy that post

I replied to share it with you and was not trying to criticize your post which unfortunately is quite accurate regarding certain agencies.

[joshcryer]

28. It was an "unpleasant experience" and "ugly little episode."

Those "enhanced techniques."

Oh wait, there's a thread with 52 recs supporting the torturer who said that...

Taking Obama's comments out of context is easy enough though.

[justiceischeap]

36. I thought you were going to say, "Heck of a job, Brownie!" nt

[BootinUp]

42. me too. nt

[Derek V]

37. Hitler had Issues

Rec to thread.

[BootinUp]

41. No, no, no. The President using the words "we tortured..." is not anywhere

in the same universe as your comparative example.

[rep the dems]

46. It's not a fair comparison at all

Yes, it could have been more firmly stated but the difference in language is clear. Active voice versus passive. And I don't even think W ever said "mistakes were made" with regard to this issue. He's still in denial

[markpkessinger]

54. The rhetorical distancing in this instance . . .

. . . lies not in the question of passive versus active voice, but in the obscene folksiness of the characterization followed by a reminder that these folks were 'patriots' and that we shouldn't get "too sanctimonious" about what they did.

[rep the dems]

57. You can argue that the "folksiness" is in bad taste

but it's also something of an Obama-ism. He used the word "folks" 11 times in that press conference. It's a term he likes to use. And yes, you're right about what he followed up with, but that's not all he said. He called it torture. He said we were wrong to do it. He said we need to take responsibility. And while I understand that that isn't enough for everyone, it's not a fair comparison to the denial and equivocation of Bush, who as far as I know has never accepted that we tortured anyone or acknowledged it as being wrong.

[Cha]

56. Not in my mind it isn't.. not even fucking close.. but, whatever keeps the rabid

hate goin'.

The President says something good and it's always.. "they're just words..blah blah blah".. now it's all about the word "folks".. like that's their fucking mantra.

"Mistakes were made".. is a damn lie. It was done on Purpose with full intent.. and they LIed their heads off to make it happen. And, yes we did fucking Torture some folks.

[markpkessinger]

70. It isn't just about the word "folks" . . .

If he had followed that statement with a call for prosecutions, I don't think anybody here would have a problem with it (although we might still think it a rather poor choice of words, given what we're talking about here). But to follow that remark with a reminder of what a difficult job the CIA had and telling us not to be "too sanctimonious" about the fact that "we tortured some folks," in effect he made excuses for that torture. Obama's statement differed from Reagan's in that whereas Reagan's statement was an attempt to distance himself from any direct responsibility, Obama's was an attempt to distance both his administration as well as the American public from the responsibility of holding the people who planned, ordered and executed torture to account for their actions. He told us we shouldn't get too sanctimonious about the fact that Americans:

• threatened harm to detainees' families;
  
  
• chained people for days on end with their hands above their heads, while in diapers, forcing them to piss and shit all over themselves;
  
  
• forced people to stand on broken legs and feet for days on end;
  
  
• left people chained to a wall for up to 17 days at a time in a standing position;
  
  
• sexually assaulted and raped people by pumping pureed nuts and hummus their asses, some of them violated to the point of rectal prolapse;
  
  
• poured cold water on a naked detainee and then left him chained to a concrete floor in an unheated cell until he died of hypothermia;

among God knows what other horrors. And despite the President's stated opposition to these tactics, his persistent refusal to pursue prosecutions of these crimes is itself morally reprehensible. What's more, the failure to prosecute will virtually guarantee not only that these crimes might again be committed in the future, but that they will. By merely ending the torture, but refusing to prosecute, the President is condoning that eventuality, whether he admits that to himself or not.

[Cleita]

47. I didn't like the "we" implicating we are all responsible. Many

of us protested this march to war to the bitter end and were very vocal in letting our elected officials know where we stood on this. He really should have said "some folks were tortured" at the very least and better yet would have been, "they tortured some folks." Please leave the "we" out of it because "we" weren't responsible or even informed until it leaked out.

[woo me with science]

49. America dragged into a moral sewer.

[Jesus Malverde]

52. "out of the loop"...nt

[Blue_In_AK]

58. I cringed when he said that.

[Odin2005]

61. At least Obama didn't use the passive voice to obscure who was doing the torture.

I'll give him at least that much.

Edit: Got my whos and my whoms mixed up...

[Rex]

62. He should have been far more precise imo. I took 11 years to get to that moment.

11 years for our government to officially come out and say we did torture people. Folks. When you say folks or people you forget there are people watching on the other end of the wires. People feel more comfortable if you elaborate on something shady, saying something quick makes them suspicious. As we see here and all over the WWW.

Don't have a quote. Just an observation.

[BeanMusical]

63. Some folks.

This sounds like a way to dehumanize the victims.

[JEB]

64. We sodomized some folks until they died.

[bigwillq]

67. K and R

[True Blue Door]

69. A rare instance where this President was tone-deaf.

Of course, the very fact that he used the word "torture" to describe the actions of his predecessors crossed a major line that even some so-called news organizations still won't.