DOWNLOADS: (2970)

PLAYS: (5651)

It's obvious that the marching orders have been given for Bushies to come forward and justify torture ever since we saw Dick Cheney do just that. This time it was Condi's turn, and she sounds just as wacky. Every time she opens her mouth she digs herself deeper in the muck. Here's her latest incoherent explanation over her remarks about the president's power to make waterboarding legal or not:

Rice: I said at one point that it was ahhh, given, right that if the president authorized it, it was legal. This was not a "Nixon/Frost" moment. What I ontended to say or what I meant to say about this is: The president said I won't authorize anything that is illegal. It's not that because he authorized it, it was legal...

And she has to even justify her position to a fourth-grader:

Days after telling students at Stanford University that waterboarding was legal "by definition if it was authorized by the president," former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice was pressed again on the subject yesterday by a fourth-grader at a Washington school.

... Then Misha Lerner, a student from Bethesda, asked: What did Rice think about the things President Obama's administration was saying about the methods the Bush administration had used to get information from detainees?

"Let me just say that President Bush was very clear that he wanted to do everything he could to protect the country. After September 11, we wanted to protect the country," she said. "But he was also very clear that we would do nothing, nothing, that was against the law or against our obligations internationally. So the president was only willing to authorize policies that were legal in order to protect the country."

Waterboarding is and always has been torture, so it was not legal. The above clip includes video of her talk at Stanford, which started this whole incident:

“[President Bush] was also very clear that we would do nothing – nothing – that was against the law or against our obligations internationally,” Rice said May 3rd at a Washington school.

And ended with her saying, again, that she didn't make a "Nixon/Frost" type gaffe.

Well, what should we call it then?

Andrea Mitchell said that she may have been bitten by an insect playing golf and was having a allergic reaction in her eye, so that's why her face looks swollen. But her words are just gibberish, and you can't help wondering if those words and their strangled reasoning are causing Condi's discomfort. Is their endgame to just try and move polling a few more points in their favor against torture investigations?

A Religious Liberal Blog

“The policy of Father Reese was to present both sides of the discussion...But that did not sit well with Vatican authorities,” - Jose M. de Vera, the Jesuits’ spokesman. They ranged from debates about sexuality to how the church ought to relate those of different faiths. For this reason Father Reese is no longer editor of one of the most respected religious journals in this country, America. One of the last actions Raztinger was to have Reese fired.

And Erik Meder,lost his position with the U.S. Jesuit Conference because of an article he wrote for a Jesuit newsletter which called for the church have an open dialogue with gay and lesbians about homosexuality. A number of catholic journals, colleges, and academics are worried about the rapidly closing space for debate and dialogue in the Catholic Church under the new pope. It's an issue which should concern everyone.

Also the new pope has leaned on Archbishop Flynn of MN to deny glbt supporters who wear the rainbow sash from partaking in commuinion. And "A pregnant student who was banned from graduation at her Roman Catholic high school announced her own name and walked across the stage anyway at the close of the program." This girl's courage and sense of self taking up what was hers, refusing to be barred because of some religious authority, is a lesson for others who find themselves shut out of the church.

Richard Ostling lets his bias show in his coverage of the ABC news show on the resurrection. He writes that the show will bring "on liberal theologians to dismiss the Easter story"..interpetations of the meaning of this story will vary with liberals and conservatives, but "dismiss"? I doubt any liberal would describe their work in such a manner. Barbara Lerner at the Nat'l Review lost his position with the U.S. Jesuit Conference because of an article he wrote for a Jesuit newsletter which called for the church have an open dialogue with gay and lesbians about homosexuality. A number of catholic journals, colleges, and academics are worried about the rapidly closing space for debate and dialogue in the Catholic Church under the new pope. It's an issue which should concern everyone.

Also the new pope has leaned on Archbishop Flynn of MN to deny glbt supporters who wear the rainbow sash from partaking in commuinion. And "A pregnant student who was banned from graduation at her Roman Catholic high school announced her own name and walked across the stage anyway at the close of the program." This girl's courage and sense of self taking up what was hers, refusing to be barred because of some religious authority, is a lesson for others who find themselves shut out of the church.

Richard Ostling lets his bias show in his coverage of the ABC news show on the resurrection. He writes that the show will bring "on liberal theologians to dismiss the Easter story"..interpetations of the meaning of this story will vary with liberals and conservatives, but "dismiss"? I doubt any liberal would describe their work in such a manner. Barbara Lerner at the Nat'l Reviewsays
about the mainline "NCC-Eurosecs with crosses who worship Castro" Does such language suggest regard for religion by the right?

 
",0]);D(["ce"]);D(["ms","410a"]);//--> saysabout the mainline "NCC-Eurosecs with crosses who worship Castro" Does such language suggest regard for religion by the right?