obama should bring this to light since mccain wants to run a respectful campaign.

let the world know mccain suffers from PTSD and is on ambian so that 3am phone call will go unanswered because a tortured mind isnt capable of dealing with reality.

call them on their bs

What, this is the first time you guys have realized this?

I am finally starting to respect Andrew Sullivan. A fanook conservative who was a cheerleader in the run up of the Iraq War now sees that his Republican masters are not as "conservative" as he thought they were.

I do not understand "Log Cabin Republicans" at all. Do they really think the Republicans care anything about them except for their votes? Republicans would love to burn every gay at the stake.

This isn't an Obama/McCain thing. It's of no use to Obama and it's a hair McCain would rather not split either. Both candidates will be plain: John McCain was tortured.

And McCain hasn't exactly been running on a "if the president does it, it's not illegal" platform. McCain is not Bush. He's his own brand of dangerous psychopath.

This is a Bush/Cheney thing. *IF* we are unfortunate enough to see a McCain administration, this is the question that those who want to investigate the PREVIOUS administration can use to defend their investigations from the Republican fuster cluckers who keep saying "there's no there there."

"I guess that means president McCain was never tortured?" is the response.

It's important not to confuse McCain with Bush. Just because McCain is a war supporter does not mean that he endorses all the nasty stupidity that has gone on. He's more Johnson than Nixon.

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

I agree with you 100%.

Fred @ 6:

I am finally starting to respect Andrew Sullivan. A fanook conservative who was a cheerleader in the run up of the Iraq War now sees that his Republican masters are not as "conservative" as he thought they were.

I do not understand "Log Cabin Republicans" at all. Do they really think the Republicans care anything about them except for their votes? Republicans would love to burn every gay at the stake.

Log Cabineers are Rockefeller closet cases. They just don't want the gubmint taxing all the huge salaries they make by not having to raise families (or by marrying for money instead of love.)

They are soulless Cylons who don't understand why anyone actually cares about anything. That's why they've misread the Christian right.

They see the Christian right as a strategic chip that the Republican party had to make some compromises to win. They don't see the Christian right as a dangerous, delusional, bigoted block of apocalypse-loving, reality-denying hatemongers who will poison any pool they touch with their rancid fingers.

They're a bit off on their assessments.

Whats more, if the people in Vietnam didn't intend to hurt McShitforBrains it doesn't count as torture. If the pain wasn't equal or greater to that of organ failure, it wasn't torture either.

I personally doen't think McCain felt enough pain to consider it to have been torture. Untill I see a film of him suffering, I can only assume he is making the entire episode up. Probably went AWAOL and sat around drinking beer with the NVA. If they can say Kerry didn't bleed enough, we get to make shit up as we go too.

Aged Blue Lensman @ 13:

The Amurkin public has come to love being tortured by these guys. Kind of a Stockholm Syndrome thing.

Its more of the Observer Effect.

Maybe this is why McCain's former Vietnamese jailer came out in support of McCain.  Bush, Cheney, McCain and the whole lot have basically vindicated and made legal the interrogation methods used on American troops back then by Vietnamese and Russian intelligence agents.

Patty D. @ 9:

I just can't wait for Bush and Chaney to get out of the WhiteHouse. They won't be impeached, they will get away with everything. I just want them to go off in the sunset and never see them again.

I think a lot of people are feeling like this these days. The real reason we can't let that happen is because it sets a number of precedents that future administrations could abuse in far more horrible ways.

We've always known our country (most countries) might do some things that are shameful, but I think we can all agree that the increase in those activities has been huge during this administration.

What do we do when another administration down the road subverts the Constitution by that much more?

JasonS @ 8:

Both candidates will be plain: John McCain was tortured.

"I guess that means president McCain was never tortured?" is the response.

It's important not to confuse McCain with Bush. Just because McCain is a war supporter does not mean that he endorses all the nasty stupidity that has gone on. He's more Johnson than Nixon.

Yes John McCain was tortured. But the legislation he voted for denies that the techniques used were toture, therefore McCain is saying that he doesn't think that what was done to him should be considered torture, so he wasn't tortured.

He does support all the nasty stuff that is going on. He has voted for it, and continues to push for continuing it. How does that make him different from Bush?

I feel bad for McCain because he is hanging with people that mock him ("he's got a black baby" 2000) that use him for his "maverick" brand to get their laws passed, and then when he has a "strength" to use, his personal knowledge of torture, they belittle it. (Just like his "black baby" story)

You'd think he would be a big proponent of "Change"!!!

Patty D. @ 9:

I just can't wait for Bush and Chaney to get out of the WhiteHouse. They won't be impeached, they will get away with everything. I just want them to go off in the sunset and never see them again.

They'll get away, but they'll also be denied the one thing they actually want: the adoration of history.

If this is just about the big rip off, then yeah, they win completely. But it's not. Bush and Cheney are not (just) greedy, pocket-stuffing motherfuckers. If they were, they would have played a much tighter game. They would have replicated the Clinton years.

No, they (or at least Dubya himself) are truly, truly, true believers. They are not behaving like people who are looking to maximize profit (though that's a nice bonus.) They are behaving like people who (and this is almost impossible to accept) ACTUALLY BELIEVE what they are saying.

If they were simply pocket-stuffing greedy slimeballs, they wouldn't have attacked Iraq. Or, if they did, they'd make sure that it came off much, much better. They'd have planted the WMDs or they would not have made WMDs the cornerstone of their case for war.

For a guy like Bush, there's nothing worse than derision, ridicule, being called a fool, being laughed at, ignored or told to sit in the corner while the adults clean up after you.

In his bubble, he probably won't hear that. But he will notice that all he gets are crickets and tumbleweeds when he speaks at any event less friendly than the Crawford Junior High School graduation commencement.

For a preview of this quantum of solace, check out Alberto Gonzales' busy itinerary.

muldoon @ 17:

As I recall, Rush Limbaugh said, "It's not torture; it's no worse than a frat hazing."

Remember the stories of GW at Yale. Where he branded initiates to his frat with a bent coat hanger? He called no worse than a cigarette burn then. That's the "guy I can drink a beer with" kind of guy we "hired" to be our president. Great.

BobD @ 22:

JasonS @ 8:

Both candidates will be plain: John McCain was tortured.

"I guess that means president McCain was never tortured?" is the response.

It's important not to confuse McCain with Bush. Just because McCain is a war supporter does not mean that he endorses all the nasty stupidity that has gone on. He's more Johnson than Nixon.

He does support all the nasty stuff that is going on. He has voted for it, and continues to push for continuing it. How does that make him different from Bush?

Yes, and Hillary voted for the war, therefore she's no different than Bush? Yes, McCain supported the torture legalization act, but he didn't suggest it.

Do not get me wrong here. He's a weasel who will do whatever he has to to win. But I put him in the same camp with Pelosi, not Bush.

And we're talking about the campaign here, not about morality or legality or common decency or common sense or ethics or human compassion. We're talking about issues that can be framed in such a way as to convince a nation of drooling morons that the person they're about to elect is "one of them."

Taunting McCain with "well, I guess you were never tortured" is no such issue partly because the equivalence is not and can not be drawn between McCain and Bush on this issue in such a way as to convince ANYONE who might be inclined to vote for McCain to not vote for him on that basis.

Stop using common sense. This is presidential politics. No wonder progressives never win.

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

While you're probably right about the Obama campaign, I don't think this is necessarily a losing approach. McCain should be called upon to explain the seeming contradiction between his POW experience and his current position on torture. Oops, "enhanced interrogation."

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

Not entirely accurate. The line that Wesley Clark used about how being shot down is not a qualification to be president is how they get this sort of stuff out. You get someone one your team to fall on their sword, they get it out into the public sphere and then Obama comes out and says, "I repudiate that remark, McCain is a hero....blah blah blah." Obama gets to look magnanimous but the damage is done.

Rusty The One Shackleford @ 30:

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

While you're probably right about the Obama campaign, I don't think this is necessarily a losing approach. McCain should be called upon to explain the seeming contradiction between his POW experience and his current position on torture. Oops, "enhanced interrogation."

This is the type of question the media should be asking McCain, but not the Obama campaign. Perhaps some brave reporter will take it on, not because it is necessarily an attack on McCain but because it more like an attack on the bush administration. If McCain reall is a "maverick" he would welcome such a question.

pissed off patricia @ 34:

Rusty The One Shackleford @ 30:

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

While you're probably right about the Obama campaign, I don't think this is necessarily a losing approach. McCain should be called upon to explain the seeming contradiction between his POW experience and his current position on torture. Oops, "enhanced interrogation."

correction:

This is the type of question the media should be asking McCain, but not the Obama campaign. Perhaps some brave reporter will take it on, not because it is necessarily an attack on McCain but because it more like an attack on the bush administration. If McCain really is a "maverick" he would welcome such a question.

John McCain was a guest of the Vietnamese. Food, lodging, cigarettes, paid medical care. Geez, it was like a vacation from duty.

I remember what assholes we thought the republicans were for mocking Kerry's service. I don't want to stoop that low. If evidence comes out that McCain has lied about something, then fine go with it.

If the Obama campaign comes out with a statement like the title of this post, they better have a smooth approach or else they will be seen as denigrating the time McCain spent as a POW. If they come from the angle that the bush administration would have considered what was done to McCain as something less than torture, that sheds pity on McCain. I don't think anyone wants to go down that road.

First off, no one should have had happen to them what mccain had happen ever, any where, any time! Including at gitmo.
It appears that mccain doesn't believe he was tortured, or at least his voting record indicates he doesn't believe what he was subjected to was torture.
Having said that I'd still like an explanation of the mccain as hero thing. Did he volunteer so no other people would be tortured? Was he the only POW to come out of Vietnam alive? Hero = someone who runs into a burning building to save another persons life.
Getting shot down in a plane does not make you a hero, unlucky, unfortunate, inept maybe, but not necessarily a hero.

Just to clarify a related fact -- McCain voted against HR2082, a bill that would have applied the Army Field Manual's rules regarding treatment of prisoner to other intelligence gathering agencies, such as the CIA. The applicable Army field manual FM22-22.3 states the following:

5-75. If used in conjunction with intelligence interrogations, prohibited actions include, but are not limited to—

- Forcing the detainee to be naked, perform sexual acts, or pose in a sexual manner.
- Placing hoods or sacks over the head of a detainee; using duct tape over the eyes.
- Applying beatings, electric shock, burns, or other forms of physical pain.
- “Waterboarding.”
- Using military working dogs.
- Inducing hypothermia or heat injury.
- Conducting mock executions.
- Depriving the detainee of necessary food, water, or medical care.

From what I've heard, at a minimum he was subjected to that last one -- depriving the detainee of medical care. I wouldn't doubt that the hood-over-the-head treatment was applied, of not more.

So, he voted against banning the CIA from using the same torture to which he was subjected. Is he for it, or again' it?

Sources:
Army Field Manual FM22-22-3
Full text of HR2082

antihostile @ 32:

Johnny2Bad @ 1:

This is dangerous, and more importantly, losing approach nationally. That's why you won't see the Obama campaign go anywhere near it.

Not entirely accurate. The line that Wesley Clark used about how being shot down is not a qualification to be president is how they get this sort of stuff out. You get someone one your team to fall on their sword, they get it out into the public sphere and then Obama comes out and says, "I repudiate that remark, McCain is a hero....blah blah blah." Obama gets to look magnanimous but the damage is done.

Aaaahh! Finally someone who understands the way the game must be played! The wingnuts have been doing this for a quarter century while the Dems stood on their futile moral high ground. And what have the Dems to show for it? Eight years in the WH out of the last 28, and those 8 years were spent defending against a relentless attack machine. If you want to win against these people, you have to play their game.

please let there be a camera or two focused on McCain when a reporter first poses this to him as a question.

While pointing out the fact that much of what McCain went through is the same as enhanced interrogation, trying to use this in a political attack could all too easily backfire severely on the Democrats. Facts have little to do with campiagns, campaigns are about emotion. While this is unfortunate, it is a political reality.

There are plenty of other things to attack McCain on without having to resort to this, hopefully the DNC is up to the task.

McCain did get tortured according to US law at the time. Now, he no longer was tortured, because the laws under Bush says he wasn't. But, he was tortured according to Geneva convention. But, according to right-wing lawers, he wasn't actually tortured because the Geneva convention is "quaint", and therefore no longer applies.

Karen @ 51:

Noting that the new definitions of torture, proposed by the Busheviks, and eventually accepted by Gone InSane, lead to the conclusion that InSane himself was never tortured entails the kind of rudimentary logic that progressives mistake for a checkmate in the illogical game of presidential politics.

We can marvel at the idiocy or cognitive dissonance of those who maintain both that Gone InSane was tortured, but that what we do now is not torture, but pointing it out to them isn't going to make any difference. It's not going to change their minds, and it's not even going to sway any of the fence-sitters.

Very well stated, and point taken. It's not often that those employing logic and reason are the ones that are apparently living in a fantasy world. Such a shame.

George Arndt @ 52:

McCain did get tortured according to US law at the time. Now, he no longer was tortured, because the laws under Bush says he wasn't. But, he was tortured according to Geneva convention. But, according to right-wing lawers, he wasn't actually tortured because the Geneva convention is "quaint", and therefore no longer applies.

Since he sealed his military record, we don't know whether he was tortured or not. For all I know he could have had an extended vacation... unless he lets the files be reviewed, that is what I will assume. After all, in this case the burden of the proof is not on my arse.

Bush and Cheney don't believe ANYTHING is torture, because they're wanton, cold-blooded, gimlet-eyed killers.

Of frogs and doves and innocent Americans and Iraqis.

Johnny2Bad @ 57:

. . . But that's the point. Its not "playing their game" if its copying their game plan. Hey, lets create "Hanoi Hilton Prisoners for the Truth" and see how that goes over. The Dems are and have been reactionaries in national politics since Bubba left. They Attack...We React...They Attack.

This "stragtegy" makes Obama look weak, petty, desperate and back on his heals.

Hmmmm. They may have something there. You can't "change the way things are done in Washington"...run a "different kind of campaign", and then do the other way. He set himself up for this with the Kumbaya primary run.

"It's time to put an end to the say-anything-to-win politics of the past. Together we can face the challenges of the future with a new kind of politics and a new kind of leadership." -barrackobama.com

This meme may play on Liberal blogs but, again, they won't touch it.

He did indeed set himself up to run a different kind of campaign. At least a different kind from the repubs. Al Gore and John Kerry ran similar campaigns.

Truth B Told @ 15:

Patty D. @ 9:

I just can't wait for Bush and Chaney to get out of the WhiteHouse. They won't be impeached, they will get away with everything. I just want them to go off in the sunset and never see them again.

They get away with it because the Democrats are on the same team. Even Obama.

And how do you know that Bush/Cheney will slither off like they are supposed to?

You think that Bush made all those signing statements and signed all that police state legislation for nothing? For window dressing?

You think that the Democrats or Obama will just overturn those? LOL. right. Power ALWAYS consolidates.

I'm pretty sure we haven't had the October surprise just yet. All of this campaign crap is just that, crap. Just more ways to distract Americans while more treasure is sucked out of the economy and more freedoms and civil rights are usurped behind our backs.

As TBT says, all of the legislation, executive orders, presidential directives and "rule changes" in various departments have not been carefully constructed by Cheney, Bush,
Chertoff et al just because they are trying to "protect" us from "terrorists." There are no freakin' terrorists - except for the aforementioned neo-con sociopaths!

When will you all wise up!? They're about to create havoc in this nation, one way or the other: meaning there will be another fake attack, or some kind of "national emergency" so they can take (keep) control, or they'll just keep crashing the economy - folks with no jobs, housing, fuel or food have a hard time arguing with the powers that be. They've spent the past number of months creating a boogie-man out of Iran, and now they've even brought Russia back into their sights. They'll have their crisis - before or after Obama or McCain takes the oath - it doesn't matter.

Milquetoast @ 45:

McCain't wasnt tortured.....Hmmmmmmm

....well then logically it would follow that...since all these "enhanced interrogation methods" were practiced on McCain't ...but it wasnt torture...then McCaint must've been a terrorist!

...and since enhanced interrogation "works" according to the Bush admin...

McCain't must've squealed like a pig to his captors ...

Milquetoast @ 45:

McCain't wasnt tortured.....Hmmmmmmm

....well then logically it would follow that...since all these "enhanced interrogation methods" were practiced on McCain't ...but it wasnt torture...then McCaint must've been a terrorist!

...and since enhanced interrogation "works" according to the Bush admin...

McCain't must've squealed like a pig to his captors ...

And if he did squeal, how many other American lives were put at risk because of his inability to withstand the NVA's "enhanced interrogation techniques?"

They all need to go through the same exact treatment they have engineered, implemented and classified as "not torture" on TV preferably FOX Tabloid News Network.

.

Correction:
McWhimpy was never tortured. Intstead, he was McEnhanced interrorgated.

.

McCain must have been enhanced queried -- and being unable to provide any useful intel., likely he let slip that daddy was a big shot. Personally any thing that has been said or published about the guy is fair game, how about a website, you could even ask Nancy Reagan about how upset she was when McCain dumped his wife. Put all of it up, long as it can be attributed.

I'm sure McCain must be greatly relieved to know that he wasn't tortured.

The only known injuries McCainchurian suffered while in Vietnam were the broken arms suffered in the plane crash. He coughed before they ever laid a finger on him.