Bush Derangement Syndrome turns humble schoolmarm into coldblooded apologist for unspeakable acts:

With all the publicity about waterboarding as a procedure that lasts a couple of minutes and simulates the feelings of drowning, I wonder how effective the procedure could be anymore. Just as we use waterboarding on our own military to prepare them for possible interrogation techniques, I'd imagine that a well-trained terrorists might undergo the same training.

And be told that Americans will only use it for a few minutes and won't actually drown anybody. The effectiveness of the procedure is probably minimal now. So the question isn't about this particular technique which may or may not qualify as torture.

In her rush to defend the deciderer, she and her fellow 27-percenter compatriots not only, erm, torture the facts (the SERE program was designed to prepare soldiers for possible Communist interrogation techniques, where truth is "beside the point" and the "aim is to force compliance to the point of false confession") but rationality itself.

Note the doublethink here: she defends the Bushies against the charge of torture, but the only conclusion one can draw from her dismissal of waterboarding's severity and effectiveness - "only lasts a couple of minutes" - is that the technique isn't brutal enough.

But wait. A 27-percenter she cites to back up her argument describes waterboarding as inducing "instant, resistance-breaking panic." So that means the technique "only lasts a couple of minutes" not because of its inherent mildness, but because its so vicious that it breaks victim's will almost instantly.

And then to top it off, she says waterboarding "won't actually drown anybody." No shit, Sherlock. 'Cause then it wouldn't be torture; it'd be murder.

I think Congress better revisit that video game legislation Hillary Clinton wanted a while back. They're making our culture too fucking violent. Or stupid. I can't tell which.