Because it Feels So GOOD

Pat Buchanan: I think he should have been put under immediate hostile interrogation, not read his Miranda rights, not allowed to see a lawyer…

Savannah Guthrie:…Pat does raise a point. They would have had a lot better luck interrogating this young man if they had made him an enemy combatant and not immediately indicted him where he gets all the rights and privileges of a US citizen,all those legal privileges, I mean, what’s your argument to that? Morning Joe, MSNBC

As Spencer Ackerman points out, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be mass killer who recently tried to blow up an airplane full of passengers, has been cooperating with authorities. This is not the “ticking time bomb” scenario beloved of so many torture fans.

So why the calls to torture him?

Because people like Pat Buchanan relish the idea of torture for its own sake. (I’ll be charitable here and attribute Savannah Guthrie’s “Pat has a point” bit to garden variety media dumbth.) In fact, I’d go so far as to say that they have an unhealthy emotional stake in the idea of torture.

Anyone who has ever argued against torture – or even argued against the mistreatment of American prison inmates – quickly becomes aware of the sheer, outraged vehemence of torture advocates. Ticking time bombs and fictional characters are invoked. Scorn is poured over the person denouncing torture, who is depicted as a weak Al Qaeda lover, a sissy. Refraining from torture is portrayed as the equivalent of cuddling terrorists and criminals, giving them teddy-bears and putting mints on their pillow at night.

All of this indicates something a bit nastier than a mere difference in opinion. These torture advocates like torture because… well… the thought of a bad guy being tortured makes them feel good.

So good, in fact, that learning that an accused terrorist has not been tortured makes them feel bad. Disappointed. Empty.

It’s just not as much fun.