How a Filipino insurgent was tortured. Damn, I wish our confirmation process was like theirs

I've been following the confirmation hearings (on C-Span and the NYT) of Michael Mukasey, George W.'s nominee to replace the unlamented Alberto Gonzales, and wish that our processes were as rigorous.

Last night, Mukasey was grilled by senators (mostly Democrats, among them Stephen Whitehouse of Rhode Island)) about his views on executive privilege, non-disclosure agreements, and the public's right to information. His answers were diametrically opposed to those of his predecessor.

However, Mukasey failed to assuage fears in regard to the use of torture in extracting information from terrorism suspects. He hedged big time in regard to water-boarding, saying that if water-boarding is determined to be torture, then it would be unconstitutional. The senators could not extract any more information on his views on the matter, stopping short of physically and mentally torturing him on the matter any further.

What really caught my attention was the account recounted by one of the senators of how a US soldier was prosecuted for using water-boarding on a Filipino insurgent in 1901.

I wish I could get my hands on the transcripts of Raul Gonzales's confirmation hearings, though I understand that he has never been confirmed and that the Gloria just keeps re-appointing her sycophant on a temporary basis. What is the limit to the executive's power to reappoint? I don't know, but this clearly runs counter to what the Constitution intends.

I am tempted to make a bigotted remark about people with the surname Gonzales, but I know better because I have so many friends with that surname and I have no wish to inflict a tortured argument on you.