This morning’s New York Times has a couple of editorials of interest. The first is from the Editorial Board, commenting on yesterday’s article from the Constitution project, declaring the reality of Bush Administration torture tactics. The second is a contribution from an historian, suggesting that the concern about low birth rates in the U.S. is overblown, and should not be used as justification to loosen immigration standards.

Interesting, eh? Didn’t someone we know write a couple of blogposts about these very topics over the past couple of days? Hmm.., c’est moi, c’est moi as Lancelot sang in Camelot. I am the eggman? I am the walrus? No! I am the diviner of truths to come…

So what that means is I am generally from a couple of days to a few weeks ahead of the curve in public discussion. For example: last August I reminded Barry O that his infatuation with drones would come to tears. What has happened? Ask Rand Paul…

I suggested that the best way for the country to move forward is for Congress and the President to work together. And what have they begun to do (at least the Senate)? Um hm…

So if only I could translate that divination skill to the outcome of horse races and/or foreseeing lottery numbers. But alas, most of this stuff is frankly just common sense. Common sense? A rare commodity these days, but we’re getting better.

Now back to those editorials. The NY Times Editorial board is just looking for more justification – some classified report written by the CIA further documenting abuses. Why? How much verification is needed? They stop short of discussing any potential for prosecution. If they did, the genie would be out of the bottle big-time. Is prosecution inevitable for those evildoers? Not necessarily. The current Administration could go a long way to assuaging the wounds created by the predecessor goon squad. Just as George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton apologized to the survivors of Japanese interment camps in World War II, this Administration can and must apologize for excesses committed in the heat of emotion post 9/11. But how is such a thing possible with the continued use of drones? Well, that’s a no brainer. The apology can accompany the statement that armed drones will no longer be used anywhere without specific permission from a host of sources, at the least the host nation and Congress. That would surely send a clear message that may obviate the need for prosecution.

Finally, the historian’s piece about population and immigration. The author is, of course, also hyping a book he wrote, entitled – yep, you guessed it, some title involving the myth of population decrease. I’d be more specific, but having just returned to the online NY Times, the piece is now no longer available. Guess the editors didn’t care for that guy’s shilling his book. Instead, they give us Grover Norquist. Oh, don’t get started with me on that guy!