Why/Why not McCain?

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Supports repealing Roe v. Wade (May 2007)

Well I'm not a fan of abortion either, if I were to impregnate a woman I would want to raise the child or at least give it up for adoption. But I've learned sometime ago not to fight battles on the shoulders of others. Repealing Roe v. Wade would open up a firestorm of medical and bodily privacy issues that I wouldn't want to touch from legal standpoint in my dumbest days.

Leave gay marriage to the states. (Jan 2007)

I consider this an issue of equality and the world has demonstrated to me that state and local governments don't always have the best interests of minorities in their hearts, neither does the federal government but federal law (I.E. the Supreme Court) has shown to be a brilliant tool in demolishing regional bigotry from a legal standpoint. In my opinion, it should be unconstitutional to outlaw gay marriage at either federal, state, or local level. I've heard the argument that gay marriage is a "slippery slope" to other things. Namely marriage involving pedophillia or Zoophilia, I consider this a cop-out from homophobes who have no legitimate argument. We're talking two consenting adults here, two adult males of normal intelligence and rationality can consent to sex and marriage. A horse cannot consent to sex nor marriage, neither can a child.

Teaching creationism should be decided by school districts. (Jun 2007)

Again, disagreed. Unscientific theories and beliefs should not be treated as having the same validity by being taught in a school district. Very much the same as teaching Holocaust Denial, 9/11 Conspiracy Theories, or the Flat-Earth, heh, "theory" wouldn't be ok either. And from a religious standpoint, sure, I'll allow you to teach creationism in schools...but only after you let Dawkins teach Evolution in church.

Ok with American presence in Iraq for 100 years. (Jan 2008)

*que dramatic chipmunk* This is the primary reason why he would not get my vote. I'm hoping for Obama, because if it came down to him and Hilary I don't know what I would do.

Supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. (May 2007)

Agreed

Climate change is real and must be addressed. (Dec 2007)

Agreed

Preserve and help our National Parks. (Jan 2000)

Agreed

Prosecute criminals, not citizens for gun ownership. (Sep 2007)

Agreed

Waterboarding is torture; we're not going to torture people. (Nov 2007)

Agreed

Refused release to hurt Vietnamese & remain loyal to POWs. (Nov 1999)

Can someone fill me in on this one?

 

[BPSCG]

A big argument against torture is that it doesn't actually work.

That's not true.

[derail]
It's a bad method of getting confessions to crimes already committed, because if you torture someone long enough, he'll confess to anything if he knows his confession will stop the torture. And you haven't accomplished anything.

Torturing for the purpose of getting information about crimes not yet committed can be effective. The classic case is Sheikh Khalid Muhammad, who gave up the names and locations of his al Qaeda buddies within seconds after his waterboarding started. When you torture someone who has information about an impending terrorist act, he knows the only way to stop the torture for good is to give you the truth, because if he lies, you're going to come back and say hello to him.

Please, stop the nonsense that torture isn't effective. If you want to say it's not a perfect interrogation technique, you'll get no argument from me, but until you find such a technique, it's foolishness to prohibit the infliction of temporary pain on one man in order to save the lives of thousands of innocent ones.
[/derail]

Apologies for the derail. There's (yet another) extensive debate going on in Social Issues about this, and I'll be happy to pick it up there with you if you like.

 

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

That's not true.

[derail]
It's a bad method of getting confessions to crimes already committed, because if you torture someone long enough, he'll confess to anything if he knows his confession will stop the torture. And you haven't accomplished anything.

Torturing for the purpose of getting information about crimes not yet committed can be effective. The classic case is Sheikh Khalid Muhammad, who gave up the names and locations of his al Qaeda buddies within seconds after his waterboarding started. When you torture someone who has information about an impending terrorist act, he knows the only way to stop the torture for good is to give you the truth, because if he lies, you're going to come back and say hello to him.

Please, stop the nonsense that torture isn't effective. If you want to say it's not a perfect interrogation technique, you'll get no argument from me, but until you find such a technique, it's foolishness to prohibit the infliction of temporary pain on one man in order to save the lives of thousands of innocent ones.
[/derail]

I'm not at all convinced that your average fanatic martyr would be willing to give up sensitive information like that, or what of the validity of his confessions? He might talk but he might say the wrong thing. Let's apply the basic gist of your first paragraph with the scenario of your second; say you torture an Islamic Terrorist for information and he tells you the location of a bomb in Chicago, you investigate, and the bomb blows up in New York. He'll be executed but this is a person who would gladly strap a bomb to his chest and blow himself up for other people, I don't expect him to come anywhere near being able to tell the truth under torture.

It’s my opinion; take it for what it’s worth, that someone with significant motivation and emotional investment in a certain cause, in this case Islamic Extremism, wouldn’t confess even under torture. And what of retaliation? Terrorists can, and have, used the torture and mistreatment of their own as justification for the torture, mistreatment, and execution of our own. Following this logic you’ve applied here it’s perfectly acceptable for any organization, either foreign or domestic, to torture US citizens for information.

 

[maxpower1227]

I seem to agree with McCain on several issues, certainly enough to vote for him.

McCain > Obama >>> Clinton

That's basically what the score is.

 

[maxpower1227]

Climate change is real and must be addressed. (Dec 2007)

Not bad, but...

Climate change is real; nuclear power is solution. (Oct 2007)

WIN

 

[fuelair]

Not McCain - but, then, not republicker.

 

[UserGoogol]

Apologies for the derail. There's (yet another) extensive debate going on in Social Issues about this, and I'll be happy to pick it up there with you if you like.

Perhaps you're right, (I disagree, but I'm willing to be persuaded since it's a question of fact and I don't claim to have a lot of evidence on hand) and I might head into that thread, but I was merely stating what the argument is.

 

[KingMerv00]

Why/Why not?

Not. I dislike him on social issue.

 

[Tricky]

Supports repealing Roe v. Wade (May 2007)

No. Bad mistake. Even with modern medicine and the abortion pill, he's throwing a bone to the religious right. If he said "modifying" I might give him a break.

Things are tough now, but we're better off than in 2000(Jan 2008)

Very wrong, although there are similarities. At both times, we were headed toward a recession. But in 2000, we did not have our troops engaged in a hopeless, expensive pointless war that drained the economy and caused a lot more anguish than Clinton's sex life.

Leave gay marriage to the states. (Jan 2007)

What's the deal with "state's rights"? Why not county rights or city rights or neighborhood rights or just total fricken anarchy? If a couple is married in Massachusetts, then they're married in Wyoming. If not, then why don't states have the right to ban interracial marriage?

Teaching creationism should be decided by school districts. (Jun 2007)

Wrong in so many ways I can't count. Can the school district decide to teach Lamarkism? Why not?

Ok with American presence in Iraq for 100 years. (Jan 2008)

Depends on what he means by "presence". Advisors? Okay. Troops? They've been there too long already.

Supports federal funding of embryonic stem cell research. (May 2007)

Obviously okay, and really, non-controversial except among the most right wing of fundies.

Climate change is real and must be addressed. (Dec 2007)

Even Bush admits this. Again, not controversial. But it depends on what he means by "addressed". Admitting it is not addressing it.

Preserve and help our National Parks. (Jan 2000)

The devil is in the details. How does he plan to do this? By selling parts of them to raise money to "preserve" the other parts? This is just a sound bite.

Prosecute criminals, not citizens for gun ownership. (Sep 2007)

I'm unaware of many places that prosecute people for gun ownership. Every place I've ever seen prosecutes criminals. This is nothing but a straw man. If he has something specific in mind, maybe he'd like to detail it.

Waterboarding is torture; we're not going to torture people. (Nov 2007)

I don't know if waterboarding is or isn't torture. I'm not even sure torture isn't a legitimate technique. But I know this. If you do it to them, you'd better not complain if they do it to you.

Refused release to hurt Vietnamese & remain loyal to POWs. (Nov 1999)

This is not even a position. This is a brag. Maybe a justifed brag, but not anything that is an issue.

Confederate flag on top of capitol was wrong; in front is ok. (May 2007)

Stupid stupid stupid. If displaying the Confederate flag on government grounds is wrong (as I believe it is) then it doesn't matter if you put it in the bottom left corner of the lowermost windowpane in the guests' bathroom. And if it's not wrong, then flying it on top is really the right thing to do. If you are going to support a flag that, for whatever reason, has become a symbol of racism, then a whisper is less honest than a shout.

Why or why not would you vote for McCain?

I would vote for McCain if there were no better candidate (like if he were running against Jesse Jackson). But there are at least two better candidates still in the race. Maybe three, if Bloomberg runs.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Not bad, but...



WIN

And does he propose a long term solution for the waste?

I mean, every energy plan is going to have nuclear, but there has to be a lot more than just that. And nuclear can't be the final answer.

 

[Tricky]

And does he propose a long term solution for the waste?

I mean, every energy plan is going to have nuclear, but there has to be a lot more than just that. And nuclear can't be the final answer.

What's the long term solution for greenhouse gasses? Nuclear waste has dangerous by-products, but so does every other form of energy, including solar.

The final answer is that we have to use less energy. A lot less.

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

Okay, now to highlight all the bad stuff from the same website:

Don't ask, don't tell is working; don't tamper with it. (Jun 2007)

Ten Commandments would bring virtue to our schools. (Jan 2000)

Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)

Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs. (Mar 2000)

Stricter penalties; stricter enforcement. (Jul 1998) [On Drugs]

Teach virtues in all schools. (Dec 1999)

Voted YES on $75M for abstinence education. (Jul 1996)

Voted YES on requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer. (Jul 1994)

Unfiltered Internet robs our children of their innocence. (Dec 1999)

The problem with health care in America is inflation. (Jan 2006) [WTF?]

GOP lost 2006 due to corrupt spending, spending, spending. (Jun 2007)

Voted YES on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice. (Jan 2006)

Voted YES on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Sep 2005)

The cause of the Iraqi war was just. (Apr 2004)

In hindsight, Iraq invasion was still justified. (May 2007)

 

[Tsukasa Buddha]

What's the long term solution for greenhouse gasses? Nuclear waste has dangerous by-products, but so does every other form of energy, including solar.

The final answer is that we have to use less energy. A lot less.

That's not really a solution at all, now is it ? (I know it's true, but just saying it doesn't really do anything)

I happen to think that by comparison, the waste of solar, wind, geo-thermal, etc. are much more manageable than all the nuclear waste we would generate if we switched the bulk of energy needs to nuclear.

 

[Tricky]

Don't ask, don't tell is working; don't tamper with it. (Jun 2007)

It's better than nothing, but honesty and tolerance would be better still.

Ten Commandments would bring virtue to our schools. (Jan 2000)

LOL. You think? How would he enforce them?

Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)

Actually, this depends. If it were demonstrable that certain jobs required heterosexuals in order to do the job, this might be legit, just like Hooter requires women with big boobs and basketball teams usually hire tall guys. But I'm guessing there aren't many jobs that require heterosexuals. Maybe if prostitution were legalized...

Administration is AWOL on the war on drugs. (Mar 2000)

I'd like to hear McCain's plan. If it's just more "get tough", then he's not exactly a visionary.

Stricter penalties; stricter enforcement. (Jul 1998) [On Drugs]

Fill up the prisons with drug abusers? They're pretty full already. Has it worked? If not, hit yourself on the head with a hammer, McCain and see if you can't come up with something better.

Teach virtues in all schools. (Dec 1999)

Like the virtues of a good education? What other "virtues"? Another stupid sound bite.l

Voted YES on $75M for abstinence education. (Jul 1996)

If it was "abstinence only" then he's a bloody idiot. It has been tried. It not only doesn't work, it achieves the opposite effects of what was intended.

Voted YES on requiring schools to allow voluntary prayer. (Jul 1994)

No school has ever been able to prevent voluntary prayer. Public prayers or public announcements of prayer, on the other hand, are a violation of civil rights, unless students are allowed to pray aloud to Satan (or James Randi, as some call him) as well as the well-known gods.

Unfiltered Internet robs our children of their innocence. (Dec 1999)

Better internet controls are needed. Parents need to keep track of what their kids are doing. But you can't get the genie back in the bottle. The information age is upon us, and if you think you can stop the tidal wave of information (of all kinds) then stick your finger right in this hole in the dike. And good luck.

The problem with health care in America is inflation. (Jan 2006) [WTF?]

Inflation of health care costs is one problem. Another is that health care is so effective that people live long past their first need to have more and more needs. It is a case of being the victim of our own success. If your 80-year-old grandfather is complaining because his health care won't cover his Viagra, then there is some sort of inflation problem, but maybe not the one McCain is talking about.

GOP lost 2006 due to corrupt spending, spending, spending. (Jun 2007)

No. They lost because of Bush Bush Bush.

Voted YES on confirming Samuel Alito as Supreme Court Justice. (Jan 2006)

Voted YES on confirming John Roberts for Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. (Sep 2005)

BFD. So did a number of Democrats.

The cause of the Iraqi war was just. (Apr 2004)

In hindsight, Iraq invasion was still justified. (May 2007)

Not many people, not even Republicans, will buy into this. They will rightly see that the invasion of Iraq by Islamic extremists happened after the US invasion, and that we have been recruiting for them since we made this incredibly stupid mistake. And if we'd kept most of our troops in Afghanistan and near the northern border of Pakistan, we'd have a lot fewer problems now.

 

[Tricky]

That's not really a solution at all, now is it ? (I know it's true, but just saying it doesn't really do anything).

Well the solution IS to use less, but of course, that is much easier said than done. It means major lifestyle changes, mostly for the worse (for Americans, anyway). It means biting the bullet. The solution means to make rules that force these changes and put some teeth into them. This is not something that any of our current crop of politicians have the nads to do.

I happen to think that by comparison, the waste of solar, wind, geo-thermal, etc. are much more manageable than all the nuclear waste we would generate if we switched the bulk of energy needs to nuclear.

I tend to agree with you, but it is not that big of a difference, with a few exceptions. Wind power doesn't have too many downsides in long-term problems but of course, it is limited. Truthfully, so is nuclear power. There is not enough uranium to replace fossil fuels, so efficient though it is, it can't replace them even IF we could be 100% certain the waste would never cause a problem.

Maybe technology will save us. Maybe we will have to revert to more simple lifestiles or, (shudder) reduce our population subtantially. We're in the golden age right now. We'd better use that gold to try to make the next age silver rather than returning to stone.

 

[Corsair 115]

Truthfully, so is nuclear power. There is not enough uranium to replace fossil fuels, so efficient though it is, it can't replace them even IF we could be 100% certain the waste would never cause a problem.

You may be interested in reading this thread from the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology forum. It goes into considerable depth about nuclear power and the issue surrounding it, including the idea of whether there is enough uranium to meet the world's energy needs.

A thread well worth reading in my opinion.

 

[Tricky]

You may be interested in reading this thread from the Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology forum. It goes into considerable depth about nuclear power and the issue surrounding it, including the idea of whether there is enough uranium to meet the world's energy needs.

A thread well worth reading in my opinion.

Interesting.

Quite long though, with the expected number of pointless, ignorant, agenda-driven and incomprehensible posts. I'll have to sift. Thankfully, I've been here long enough to know which posters I can ignore without missing anything substantial, and which ones need careful attention.

 

[HereticHulk]

If anything service makes him the only candidate that can actually know what he is asking our troops to do.

Like what? Get shot down and captured? Well done John 'warmonger' McBush.

Like Buchanan said, McCain will make Cheney look like Gandhi.

I'll be moving up the Canada with TAM if McCain is our next president eh?

 

[Corsair 115]

I'll be moving up the Canada with TAM if McCain is our next president eh?

Uh, who said we'll let you in?

 

[BPSCG]

I'm not at all convinced that your average fanatic martyr would be willing to give up sensitive information like that, or what of the validity of his confessions? He might talk but he might say the wrong thing.

Again, you mustn't confuse torturing for purposes of getting a confession to a crime already committed with torture for the purpose of getting information to prevent a crime that has not yet been committed.

...this is a person who would gladly strap a bomb to his chest and blow himself up for other people, I don't expect him to come anywhere near being able to tell the truth under torture.

It’s my opinion; take it for what it’s worth, that someone with significant motivation and emotional investment in a certain cause, in this case Islamic Extremism, wouldn’t confess even under torture.

That's a lovely theory. Now please explain why it failed in the case of Khalid Sheikh Muhammad, who caved after only a few seconds of waterboarding. Do you really believe the guy who masterminded the September 11 attacks didn't have "significant motivation and emotional investment" in his cause?

Or is it possible that your theory doesn't stand up to experimentation, and that torture can indeed be effective in getting information?

A popular claim among anti-torture advocates is that people will say anything to stop torture. That is correct.

You understand, don't you, that "anything" includes the truth? As you point out, "he might say the wrong thing," but he knows that if he does, the torturers are going to come back to discuss his answers with him, repeatedly, until they are satisfied he's given them the truth. Khalid Sheikh Muhammad apparently understood that.