The effervescent Roberta McCain, 96 year old mother of former Presidential candidate John McCain, was on The Tonight Show last night. Both your Gagglers spent a good portion of their recent lives following John McCain around the country, and can personally attest to the fact that the elder Mrs. McCain is dynamic and endlessly entertaining. (That, and she's got a pretty enviable wardrobe for a woman in her 90s. This Gaggler sure hopes she can still wear pumps sixty years from now. But I digress.) Asked about Limbaugh, she replied that her brand of Republicanism has nothing to do with what he represents. "I don't know what the man means. I don't know what he's talking about," she said, adding she thinks GOP Chair Michael Steele was right (yes, right, don't hear that very often...) to label Limbaugh as an entertainer, and was horrified that the party made him back away from that comment. "I don't know what he is. But he does not represent the Republican Party that I belong to," Mrs McCain said. Gee. Those McCain women sure are feisty lately.

Limbaugh's response? " McCain's mother is dumping on me!" he said today. "She is absolutely right. The Republican Party she belongs to gets shellacked, election after election." Really? I sort of thought the Party Rush belongs to hasn't been doing that well either.

Who would have thought that in mid-May 2009, the names "Rove" and "Cheney" would appear so often in my email news alerts? Weird. Here are the latest tidbits:

CIA Denies Cheney's Request to Release Memos: According to MSNBC, CIA spokesperson Paul Gimigliano said this today: "The process for Mandatory Declassification Review is governed by Executive Order 12958, as amended. That Order excludes from review information that is the subject of pending litigation. The two documents that former Vice President Cheney sought contain information that falls into that category....For that reason -- and that reason only -- CIA did not accept Mr. Cheney's request for a Mandatory Declassification Review. The Agency simply followed the Executive Order. This request was handled in accordance with normal practice by CIA professionals with long experience in information management and release. It was for them a straightforward issue"

Karl Rove Will Be Questioned on U.S. Attorney Firings: The Washington Post is reporting that Connecticut Prosecutor Nora Dannahey will question Rove tomorrow about his role in the firing of nine U.S. Attorneys. Dannahey is heading up the ongoing investigation into whether Justice Department or White House officials obstructed justice in relation to the sackings.

Remember the "war on drugs"? You know, that 80's relic that assumes its more beneficial to lock users up in overcrowded prisons than to rehabiliate them? (Unless you're a really weathly dude who just snorts at parties sometimes, in which case, carry on.) Yeah, that old thing. Well, Obama's recently appointed drug czar, Gil Kerlikowske says he's done with the term. He gave his first interview since assuming office to the Wall Street Journal yesterday, and told them that, "Regardless of how you try to explain to people it's a 'war on drugs' or a 'war on a product,' people see a war as a war on them...We're not at war with people in this country." Kerlikowske hopes that the Obama administration will deal with drugs as a public health issue, not just a criminal justice one. He certainly doesn't support legalizing drugs, but wants to see policies that focus as much on demand and treatment as they do on law enforcement. He supports needle exchange programs, calling them "part of a complete public-health model for dealing with addiction." Kerlikowske has been criticized for being too lax on drugs during his time as Seattle's Chief of Police, but Tom Coburn was the only Senator to vote against his nomination.

Nancy Pelosi has been engaged in an uncomfortable dance around her knowledge of detainee torture over the past few weeks. In the latest installment of her awkward twisting routine, Pelosi now says that the CIA mislead her during briefings. "We were told explicitly that waterboarding was not being used," she told reporters at a presser today. This, after weeks of saying she was never briefed about waterboarding. She also informed reporters that her top national security adviser learned that prisoners were being waterboarded in a February 2003 briefing. Pelosi says her response was to let Jane Harman, a longtime Pelosi frenemy who replaced the Speaker as the top Dem on the Intelligence Committee, take the issue up with the Administration. She also reiterated her call for an independent Truth Commission to delve into who knew what when, who did what to whom, and who said any of this was OK in the first place. 

Pelosi's statements today must be like nails down a chalkboard for the White House. Obama has made it clear he wants to move past this issue, and has given the idea of a commission a cool reception. But try as he might, it continues to make headlines - with a little help from Dick Cheney. Like him or loathe him (either way, he really doesn't care), the once media-shy Cheney has effectively kept this issue in the news. Obama has other priorities now, both ones forced upon him - like the economy, the ailing auto industry and Afghanistan/Pakistan - and ones he's actively seeking to address, most notably healthcare. The last thing he wants is for his agenda to be derailed by a prolonged, convoluted debate of the culpability of Bush-era officials (on both sides of the aisle) with regards to this messy, unpleasant yet ultimately profound issue. But he might not get a say in it.

Obama may be ready to move on, but a lot of his voters aren't. Many are eager to see officials held to account for their actions. So far, Obama has made clear his personal stance against torture, but has been pushing off real litigation. That's not going to be enough for some. If torture is part of Bush's legacy, how it is dealt with could well be Obama's. And if Obama is serious about restoring America's image in the world, he's going to need to show that when people undermine American values - like humane treatment of prisoners - they can't walk away from their actions, even if they've been voted out of office. Yes, an independent commission will be distressing and unsavory, and it will keep torture in the headlines. But that's happening anyway. The country isn't moving on. Perhaps Obama's best move is to support an independent commission, effectively handing over the torture issue. This helps remove him from centerstage in this debate, freeing him to carry on with his agenda. And, perhaps most significantly, history will show that his administration actively dealt with another problem handed to him, this time one of the most important ethical issues of our day.