Anyway, the problem I have with the “moral compass” argument is that I think it’s a wee bit of an overreaction. We waterboarded three people, that’s out of thousands and of captured fighters.

How many did we technically torture? I guess it depends on what the definition of torture is, that really hasn’t been nailed down. We also don’t know for sure. The overwhelming fact is that the vast, vast majority of those that we captured, probably somewhere near 95%, were not tortured.

I don’t think you completely lose your “moral compass” for torturing a couple people who did a lot worse to this country than we did to them. Especially considering the fact that it worked.

I mean think about it. You’ve got a terrorist in custody. You know he knows there’s going to by another attack, he might even tell you he knows. You can’t tell me that you wouldn’t slap him around and pour some water up his nose to get that information out. And we know now that actually happened, that we got information from torture that stopped another attack. Not doing that would have been irresponsible. And to be honest I think Obama would have done the same thing.

I hope you take the time to read http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/opinion/24krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion and then tell me why things like laws are overrated.