Hopes for Bush Prosecutions Fade, Left Crestfallen

In his interview this morning at "This Week," Barack Obama signaled the supreme unlikelihood of war crimes prosecutions against top Bush administration officials. I'm making the rounds of all of the commentary and we see hand-waving at Democratic impropriety, with lamentations of anticipated GOP stonewalling, and harrumphing disgust that Republicans have issues with the shameful terror-enabler and attorney general-nominee Eric Holder (and that's not mentioning Glenn Greenwald, who's always the worst of the worst).

I've hammered Barack Obama almost a year, but he'll do the country a huge favor if he continues to ignore the unhinged fringe of the Democratic Party (folks who want justice not so much as revenge). In any case, the most pithily insightful thing I've read on this is from Charles Fried, who prefaces his argument against torture trials as such:

If you cannot see the difference between Hitler and Dick Cheney, between Stalin and Donald Rumsfeld, between Mao and Alberto Gonzales, there may be no point in our talking.

Not much to add there, except, "BAM!", to borrow from a well-known culinary expert.