Ted Rall by Ted Rall

Ted Rall

Comments (31) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. petermwolk

    petermwolk GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 month ago

    I was a major Obama supporter in 2008. I remember the first waves of buyer’s regret (not that Romney was a choice) when he gave a unmemorable inauguration speech – I was so sure I was going to hear a JFK-2. But there was so much difference between his nomination acceptance speech in Chicago and that … something was just so wrong.

    But the second wave came when I started to hear “folks” used everywhere instead of “people”, “men and women”, “citizens”, “soldiers”, whatever. I’ve got a good ear – and all of that was as phony as hell.

    We didn’t want the Bush soundtrack – “nyoo-clear”, “misunderestimate”, and, yes, “folks” – continued. We didn’t want to go back to crackerbarrel. (At least GWB was authentic in his lack of fluency.)

    What an embarrassing time the last six years have been for so many of us. So very sad.

  2. Jase99

    Jase99 said, about 1 month ago

    @petermwolk

    As much as I didn’t want McCain nor Romney to win their respective election, I couldn’t bring myself to vote for Obama. I instead voted third party. I’ll vote Democrat again when they run a candidate that earns my vote.

  3. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 1 month ago

    I find it terrible that Obama tortured people, unlike his noble predecessor Bush, Jr who never tortured anyone: his top legal aids having proved conclusively that the US was employing perfectly legal interrogation techniques that were absolutely NOT torture.


    And if those techniques were harsh, those interrogated eventually confessed. There is no better proof of guilt than a confession under enhanced interrogation. No one knows their own guilt better than the perpetrators of a crime, and the best way to elicit the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth is with the most enhanced interrogation one can think of.


    The methods of the brilliant forensic innovator Tomás de Torquemada were not been fully appreciated before Bush, Jr saw that those methods were brought back, even if he didn’t give Tomás the credit he deserved.


    (And we must also thank Eric Blair for his Guide to Proper English Usage that was very closely followed by all the spokespersons for the Bush, jr administration.)

  4. John Locke

    John Locke said, about 1 month ago

    Torture works. It’s been used successfully for longer than the Roman army’s professional Quaestionarius position in every headquarters unit. Now, what exactly is torture? That is the question. Ripping fingernails out or smashing testicles for sure. How about playing loud music? Preventing sleep? Cold, cramped, etc. Simulated drowning? Definitions can be argued but effectiveness cannot. Anyone who thinks torture doesn’t work is naive.

  5. jrmerm

    jrmerm said, about 1 month ago

    Everything is all folked up.

  6. opednance

    opednance said, about 1 month ago

    @John Locke

    In WW II, the US hanged Japanese soldiers for waterboarding American POWs. Can’t just change the definition when it suits you.
    -
    Torture only gets the victim to say what you want to hear so the pain will stop. It is NOT effective in getting accurate information and never was.

  7. John Locke

    John Locke said, about 1 month ago

    @opednance

    We did a whole lot more than hang Japanese soldiers in WWII for a whole lot of reasons. Also, I didn’t change any definitions of torture. I asked you to think about it. And, finally, you are naive. A competent torturer determines lies from truth. It’s part of the process. Whoever started this whole idea that torture doesn’t work could sell shoes to snakes!

  8. opednance

    opednance said, about 1 month ago

    @John Locke

    Is John McCain naive? I think he knows what he is talking about as far as torture is concerned since he was a victim of it himself.
    -
    Your idea that a torturer can separate fact from fiction is ludicrous. Read ANYTHING from experts on this and you will find that torture is not effective in obtaining facts, it is effective in obtaining CONFESSIONS that may or may not be true.

  9. Ted Rall

    Ted Rall GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 month ago

    @petermwolk

    Just a reminder, in 2008 the Republicans ran McCain. Not that he was a choice, either. Better not to have voted – no doubt about it.

    A close friend told me she’d voted for Obama precisely never to have to hear that “folks” crap again…and yet, here we are.

    “Folks”…“homeland”…fascism! We’re soaking in it.

  10. Ted Rall

    Ted Rall GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 month ago

    @John Locke

    Oh, John, why are you trolling? There are a few cases where torture successfully extracted information, but many, many more where it did not, and led the torturers off on wild goose chases. It’s so unreliable that it’s far more effective to dedicate your efforts to other means of finding things out.

  11. emptc12

    emptc12 said, about 1 month ago

    @John Locke

    In what real sense does torture work? The admissions are of doubtful value. In desperation, people will say anything to have the torture stop, and will say whatever the torturer suggests. Recent examples include the Jon Burge police torture scandals in Chicago, in which the city has paid many millions of dollars to torture victims who gave crime confessions under duress. Examples in past history include the witch trials that swept Europe in the fourteenth through seventeenth centuries (read EXTRAORDINARY POPULAR DELUSIONS AND THE MADNESS OF CROWDS). Hundreds of thousands were killed as a result.
    .
    I think certain people have always enjoyed inflicting torture on the weak for sick reasons that have little to do with finding the truth. Call me naïve, if you want. Torture has no place in civilized societies.

  12. Rx71Wm29

    Rx71Wm29 GoComics PRO Member said, about 1 month ago

    Hummm. Ted sure knows how to boil down things to their base elements. With emphasis on the word “base”. Wink, wink.

  13. TripleAxel

    TripleAxel said, about 1 month ago

    @Ted Rall

    It would be nice if torture didn’t work. History tells us otherwise. That is not to say that torture cannot be used ineffectively or sometimes fail to retrieve useful information. But if combined with effective interrogation it will produce results – which is why we do not expect our captured soldiers to be able to keep secrets from the enemy indefinitely.
    -
    Waterboarding is not torture – it does not damage or maim the body and it does not intended to inflict pain. If waterboarding counts as torture due to the stress it places on a prisoner then most of the coercive features that are incidental to holding and interrogating prisoners of war must also be classified as torture. You cannot give them up without giving up on interrogation and on the concept of capture – which may be part of the reason why the Obama Administration seems so unwilling to take prisoners these days.

  14. Donald Williams

    Donald Williams said, about 1 month ago

    @petermwolk

    We didn’t want the Bush soundtrack – “nyoo-clear”….
    .
    Actually, the way he said it was “New-ca-ler” — the idiot.
    Smiley

  15. opednance

    opednance said, about 1 month ago

    @TripleAxel

    You can keep repeating that torture works but history disagrees. Torture can lead to confessions, but the victim is just saying anything to get the pain to stop.
    -
    Have you been waterboarded? I’m still waiting for Sean Hannity to have it done on him since he is another that claims it isn’t torture.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (16).