Paul Campos writes in Rocky Mountain News a confusing piece, touting his support and activism for the Obama campaign, yet admitting:
Still, the whole business has left me rather depressed, because, in the end, I don't really believe in Barack Obama. For one thing, I don't believe in "change" - an empty concept if there ever was one.Talk about a man of no principle, treating a ballot as if it were just a piece of scrap paper.
Then Campos makes a prediction on which route President Obama would take with regards to Bush's authorization to use torture:
So the Obama administration is faced with a difficult moral choice: It can enforce the law, or it can do the politically expedient thing and ignore the nation's constitutionally binding treaty obligations when those obligations require something as disturbing as prosecuting American war criminals.He's probably right because ever since the beginning of Obama's political life, he has chosen the path of political expediency. He's in the White House because he's a great politician.
Every indication is that Obama will choose the latter course.
But let's go back to the subject of torture. I've always thought a good test would be to put yourself in such a situation:
Your wife (or loved one) is abducted, and her location and well-being is unknown. Authorities have captured a man who could have information leading to save your wife. The criminal is being a hard-ass and not talking. You could pull his fingernails and waterboard him for a chance to attain information, or you can have your lawyer talk to his lawyer for days and weeks. Time is running out.
Mr. Campos, what would you do?
Posts
