Bush: It's Mukasey or Nothing

But legal blogger Marty Lederman points out that Congress has repeatedly banned torture in the past. In fact, he writes, "if there is any single thing imaginable that the Senate, the Congress, and the world community have not'declined to do,' it is to ban torture categorically."

Lederman adds: "That's not to say it would not also be a good thing to enact the Biden bill, which would specifically require all United States personnel, including the CIA, to use only interrogation techniques authorized by the Army Field Manual. That would be yet another step that would help prevent the Bush Administration from violating the current bans on torture by doing things such as implausibly characterizing its torture as 'not torture.'"

Bush's Hitler Comparison

Jennifer Loven writes for the Associated Press: "President Bush compared Congress' Democratic leaders Thursday to people who ignored the rise of Lenin and Hitler early in the last century, saying 'the world paid a terrible price' then and risks similar consequences for inaction today.

"Bush accused Congress of stalling important pieces of the fight to prevent new terrorist attacks by: dragging out and possibly jeopardizing confirmation of Michael Mukasey as attorney general, a key part of his national security team; failing to act on a bill governing eavesdropping on terrorist suspects; and moving too slowly to approve spending measures for the Iraq war, Pentagon and veterans programs."

Here's precisely what Bush said: "History teaches that underestimating the words of evil, ambitious men is a terrible mistake. In the early 1900s, the world ignored the words of Lenin, as he laid out his plans to launch a Communist revolution in Russia -- and the world paid a terrible price. The Soviet Empire he established killed tens of millions, and brought the world to the brink of thermonuclear war.

"In the 1920s, the world ignored the words of Hitler, as he explained his intention to build an Aryan super-state in Germany, take revenge on Europe, and eradicate the Jews -- and the world paid a terrible price. His Nazi regime killed millions in the gas chambers, and set the world aflame in war, before it was finally defeated at a terrible cost in lives and treasure.

"Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. And the question is: Will we listen?"

It's not the first time Bush has made that analogy. In fact, Bush used some of the same exact phrases in a speech he gave shortly before the 2006 mid-term elections: "History teaches that underestimating the words of evil and ambitious men is a terrible mistake," he said. "Bin Laden and his terrorist allies have made their intentions as clear as Lenin and Hitler before them. The question is: Will we listen?"

At that time, (see my Sept. 6, 2006, column) several pundits became irate over the comparison. Yesterday on CNN, Jack Cafferty let loose: "Where does he get this stuff? We're talk about confirmation hearing in congressional committee for a cabinet officer and he's babbling about Lenin and Hitler? I mean -- come on! I'm tired of being told to be afraid. The people are tired of being told to be afraid. Just get off of it. Either win the argument on the merits or go away and leave me alone."

The Importance of Osama

As I've raised several times before (see my July 25 column), it's hard to imagine anyone doing better publicity for bin Laden than Bush. Likening him to Lenin and Hitler makes bin Laden sound vastly scarier than he is, which is exactly what he wants.

And then there's the fact that Bush used to be so dismissive of the man. Back in early 2002, on the defensive for not having captured or killed bin Laden yet, Bush famously said: "I truly am not that concerned about him."

Dick Polman, blogging for the Philadelphia Inquirer, notes these two conflicting views and writes: "If Osama bin Laden in the past was 'marginalized' and unimportant and thus not worthy of the president's attention, yet now he is apparently so important that he warrants the president's attention, it can mean only one of two things: either bin Laden is still on the margins and Bush is intentionally lying in order to serve his current political needs -- or bin Laden is indeed resurgent, in which case Bush has fundamentally botched the war on terror."