Stop--You're Killing Me

Nothing says more about Shrubusto the man--and his whole sorry administration--than his threatened first veto--it's all about the torture:

In his five years in the White House, President Bush has yet to veto a single piece of legislation. Yet he's threatening what may be an unprecedented veto of a major military spending bill during wartime if it contains an amendment banning U.S. torture of military prisoners...

Reflect for a moment: The president of the United States, the leader of the free world, may veto a measure that bans "cruel, inhuman or degrading" treatment of any prisoner in the hands of the U.S. government. Has this country really strayed that far from the liberties and the rule of law that it was founded to uphold?

Sen. John McCain, the Arizona Republican who sponsored the amendment, rightly notes that his proposal merely codifies what has been assumed to be the law for decades. In addition to prohibiting abuse of detainees, the amendment would require that all U.S. troops, as well as other federal agencies such as the CIA, adhere to interrogation and detention standards outlined in the Army Field Manual...

Last week, the White House warned the Senate that an appropriation containing the anti-torture provision might be vetoed, because it would tie the president's hands on terrorism. It would be helpful if the note had included some mention of the federal laws and constitutional provisions that give a president the authority to allow the abuse and torture of detainees.

Not only is abuse and torture of prisoners and detainees unconstitutional, immoral and ineffective, it has an ominous flip side. U.S. military leaders warn that such treatment puts American forces at greater risk of being mistreated when they are captured by hostile forces.

And, in the interest of generating a wider audience for those now cloaked behind New Pravda's wall of selectivity, here's Bob Herbert on the same topic:

So who would you expect to remain out of step with this important march toward sanity, the rule of law and the continuation of a longstanding American commitment to humane values?

Did you say President Bush? Well, that would be correct.

The president, who has trouble getting anything right, is trying to block this effort to outlaw the abusive treatment of prisoners.

Senator McCain's proposal is an amendment to the huge defense authorization bill. The White House has sent out signals that Mr. Bush might veto the entire bill if that's what it takes to defeat the amendment.

The Washington Post summed the matter up in an editorial that said:

"Let's be clear: Mr. Bush is proposing to use the first veto of his presidency on a defense bill needed to fund military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan so that he can preserve the prerogative to subject detainees to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. In effect, he threatens to declare to the world his administration's moral bankruptcy."

No torture is a no-brainer. Pro torture, quite frankly, simply means which flavor of oppression you prefer.