Obama's Bogus "Rule of Law"

Waterboarding is NOT torture, except by the prissy standards of the ACLU and America-haters like George Soros. Of course, Obama's recent speech on "national security," which Obama has redefined as "making nice with those who want to kill us," made much about his commitment to "the rule of law." Obama never really defined that concept, mainly because it is little more than a platitude.

(Note: Scroll down to the previous column for an analysis of Obama's major failings as a public speaker.)

Obama implies that he, our national custodian of righteousness, is for "the rule of law," while the wicked Bush Administration supposedly was against it. Logically and intellectually, his argument is worthy of the third-brightest student in a middle school.

In the real world, people disagree on what laws mean -- on how they should be interpreted. In fact, that's why we have judges, courts, and attorneys -- an insight that shouldn't come as news to lawyers like Obama and his sour, angry spouse. They both went to a big-time law school, Harvard, where they apparently learned nothing except to feel eternally superior to people who didn't graduate from Ivy League institutions.

Barack Obama is "sure" that waterboarding constitutes torture. Actually, it appears he's sure that calling it torture will appeal to the far-left types who catapulted him into high office. Exactly why he supposedly thinks it's torture is something we will never hear in this lifetime. Remember, this is the guy who didn't think that listening to Rev. Wright's harangues for 20 years didn't constitute cruel and unusual punishment for him and Michelle.

Torture is not defined as unpleasant interrogation -- enhanced or unenhanced. It is not defined as questioning people under high-stress conditions -- the kind that might actually produce useful information necessary to prevent the death of thousands (tens of thousands?) of Americans.

"Torture" is treatment that creates permanent injuries and intense, unbearable pain. Examples? Burning someone with a hot poker . . . or tearing out a person's fingernails with a pliers . . . or hooking up battery cables to their genitals . . . or scalding them with hot water . . . or making them read nonstop the various autobiographies of Barack Hussein Obama.

Waterboarding is very different. Essentially, it involves pouring small amounts of water into a supine individual's face to give him the ILLUSION of drowning. Is it very unpleasant? Yes. But is it any worse than jumping into a pool and breathing in when you should have breathed out? Nope.

Is it really dangerous? Of course not. But as we learned with Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheik Muhammed, it was very effective at eliciting information that saved countless American lives. GWB was interested in saving lives. Obama is more interested in saving face.

I'd love to debate this issue with clueless souls like Obama and Eric Holder. But the chances of that happening are about the same as someone actually being harmed by waterboarding. In other words, zero.

Is Obama really a "skilled debater?" We really won't know that until he actually debates someone.