Imperial Logic: Lapdogs yap, as rats flee ship

A piece in todays NYT by Neil A. Lewis Furor Over Cheney Remark on Tactics for Terror Suspects, showcases the flailings of Tony Snow attempting to deny that Dick "Dunk 'em" Cheney bragged about torture. Smintheus brought this to our attention, as a story that emerged from bloggers following wingnut radio. The story seems to be growing legs, while the wheels come off the administration's talking points discipline. No matter what Dick said, he was not talking about torture, because the administration does not discuss interrogation tactics!

Tony Snow, the White House spokesman, said Mr. Cheney was not endorsing water-boarding, a coercive interrogation technique that simulates drowning and that many have said qualifies as torture. Mr. Snow said Mr. Cheney was not, in fact, referring to any technique, whether it was torture or not, because administration officials do not discuss interrogation methods.

Sweet defense.  The administration, always keen to maximize irony, are torturing logic even as they deny torture by semantic fiat. No Dick doesn't discuss torture and no the U.S. doesn't do torture, no matter what acts its soldiers or contractors commit, they cannot be torture. (for that we send people to Syria, Egypt, or until recently, Uzbekistan.)

The story recounts the 'no-brainer'  dialog discussed by this diary, then recounts another good exchange:

The exchanges grew testy at times, especially when Mr. Snow said Mr. Cheney is not someone who slips up. One reporter noted that the vice president had once used a profanity on the Senate floor, and also shot a friend in the face during a hunting accident last February.

It is just nice to see a reporter confront blatant lies from the administration, and see it printed!

It can't have anything to do with the panic in the influence buying markets...

 Actually, the remarkable effectiveness of the K-Street Project at making lobbyists partisan and cutting off funds to Democrats has provided an opportunity for us. With the implosion of that network, the corporate influence peddlers are temporarily crippled. Even now they are floating, like Voldemort, disembodied and looking for new committee chairmen (and chairwomen!) to invest in:

The shift in political giving, for the first 18 days of October, has not been this pronounced in the final stages of a campaign since 1994, when Republicans swept control of the House for the first time in four decades.

Though Democratic control of either chamber of Congress is far from certain, the prospect of a power shift is leading interest groups to begin rethinking well-established relationships, with business lobbyists going as far as finding potential Democratic allies in the freshman class -- even if they are still trying to defeat them on the campaign trail -- and preparing to extend an olive branch the morning after the election.

...

While Republicans and Democrats are feverishly soliciting contributions until Election Day, campaign finance reports filed this week provide a window into the final days of a raucous midterm election campaign. The analysis of 288 corporate political action committees, which have contributed more than $100,000 this election cycle, found that at least 65 committees had increased their ratio of contributions to Democrats by at least 15 percentage points, including Sprint, United Parcel Service and Hewlett-Packard.

...

Spending in the midterm election campaign is forecast to reach $2.6 billion, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, including $1 billion from political action committees. While many business groups have been eager to appear as if they have been handily contributing to Democratic efforts, it was not until this month that the trend became apparent enough to quantify beyond party leaders or prospective committee chairmen.

Democrats who are not in tight races -- or even standing for re-election in some cases -- have seen their contributions increase more than some of those facing the most competitive contests. That is an easy way, lobbyists say, for political action committees to increase the share of their Democratic contributions, a percentage that is carefully tracked by party leaders when they reach the majority.

Representative Adam Smith of Washington, who leads a coalition of centrist Democrats, said he has detected a friendlier relationship with the business community in recent months, a welcome change from years of Republican rule when "Democrats were basically frozen out in every way."

"I hope that the new Democratic majority will take a more open and cooperative approach," Mr. Smith said in an interview. "I hope there won't be a sense of, `Oh, you gave too much money to Republicans, so we're not going to talk to you.' "

We gotta keep an eye on this Smith guy.

Meanwhile the netroots are stepping to the plate with cash, know-how and energy. We should make sure the democrats who come into office remember us even when lobbyists still brown from their work with the GOP come snuffling around.  If the corporatists are smelling a sea change, how long can it be before their media cartel co-opts it?  Those of you who can recall the mood shortly before the 2004 'election', passing the Shock and Awe barrier, will remember that even O'Lielly had dis-endorsed Bush.  What I am saying is this, it will be a struggle for us to keep any influence we gain in the upcoming election.
I am also saying that we must keep recording administration interviews with wingnut radio. It will be admissible in court!