The world has turned upside down!!! (Re: McCain vs. Obama for President)

I am not saying that YOU endorse torture.I am just absolutely baffled by anyone who would defend a man like John McCain who DOES endorse torture.You see for me, torture is a deal breaker for all the reasons I listed before. It is a stain upon our nation.John McCain is not a patriot. No one is who would EVER compromise on this issue. No one put it better than George Washington. I'll quote it again for you.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Seriously, please try to read it again. I am saying that what is astounding is the thought that just because he was a victim, that his opinion on torture would be superior. The argument that you are taking.I am saying, he should know better precisely because he was a victim.It make it worse for John McCain, not better.An analogy would be if instead of a torture victim he was a rape victim, yet voted against legislation for outlawing rape. Its at that level.Rape, Murder, Torture. We MUST not tolerate anyone in our government condoning these things for any reason whatsoever.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I did address is. You just decided to skip that part in your reply. The whole other part of my post DID talk about who would be best qualified. John McCain should know exactly that torture does not work because in fact it DID NOT work on him. He gave up false information under torture just to get it to stop. Just like it does on pretty much everyone else it is used upon. Well for me supporting torture is sort of a big issue for a presidential candidate. It may not be for you and that is okay. Its America and you can defend someone who supports torture if you want to. But don't expect people to give you a pass for it.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I mean that is obvious enough. But to me, this is an issue that is pretty sick to play politics with. Especially since he considers himself to be such an advocate for the troops. The morality and/or effectiveness aside, the danger it put our troops under when we fail to abide by humane treatment treaties should be enough to make any American be appalled that John McCain, or ANYBODY for that matter regardless of party or philosophy, would politicize this issue. Yet even though he had been a champion of this cause he didn't work with his part to propose any reasonable alternatives. This was a total political pissing contest and when it comes to the issue of torture, I want leader who will have a little bit more reverence and humility. I am actually quite shocked that the Republicans ended up on McCain. Not that the rest of their field was much better but damn, almost anyone else that was running has more integrity than this guy.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Then please clarify... What are you saying here when this is in response to my criticism of McCain and his torture vote. Because to me it very much seems like you are apologizing for him.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

The only thing I can see wrong is that AFAIK the UN Security Council includes Russia who have veto power over the actions of the council.But I don't think that is necessarily a mistake because it would force Russia to reject international assistance for securing the disputed regions from Georgian attacks which is their excuse for getting involved in the first place. If they reject it, it only reinforces the criticism they have been taking that their actions are expansionist rather than reactionary.I see nothing wrong, maybe you can point it out.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

So you have nothing to say about my reasoning that if this were brought to the council it would basically be a 'call out' to Russia?Are you trolling again?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Except for the fact that the tone and tact that Obama took is exactly what France and other intercessors used to get Russia to accept a ceasefire. The Bush/McCain/Rice tact of "consequences" for Russia got Putin to say to our President, "Fuck You". Literally, our President was cussed out by someone who is not, technically, the leader of Russia.The Obama approach, (i.e. the rational approach that the rest of the world is using in this situation), brought results.The saber-rattling of Bush/McCain brought ridicule.You decide who is more incompetent.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Yea, Russia has in fact stopped short of what they were CLEARLY positioning themselves to do which was to take the capitol. You know why they stopped? The French intervened!You have both Bush and McCain standing up on podiums in the US doing nothing but critizing Russia and to what end? A "Fuck You" from Putin? (literally) Did that help?I'll give you that the French didn't make the situation perfect. But they DID stop the killing. Yes Russia is still there and they will likely annex the break-away states.The reason Russia is still in Gori, in undisputed territory, is to secure abandoned Georgian weapons from falling into irresponsible hands.Most people in the US don't realize, and McCain and Bush certainly will never say it, that Georgia was the aggressor in this circumstance. Georgia was recklessly killing Ossetians in an attempt to take back the break-away states and since those people are Russian citizens, Russia of course took the opportunity to jump in.Granted, I am not claiming that Russia does not have alterior motives. They likely wanted to do this for a very long time but Georgia gave them the excuse they needed.Also, what kind of bullshit credibility does both Bush and McCain have, they both said this or something similar, "In the 21st centry, nations don't invade other nations". First of all, why is McCain parroting Bush on this? Second, how can they have the balls to stand there on a podium and say that while we have our armed forces in occupation of 2 different countries right in RUSSIA'S BACK YARD!?You want to talk about incompetence!

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

It does depend on who you read but even a casual knowledge of even mainstream coverage of this would have given you this. You seemingly have no clue.Russian warplanes target Georgia - CNN.com The Guardian also reports the claim:Georgia declares 'state of war' over South Ossetia | Georgia | The GuardianAs does the BBC:BBC NEWS | Europe | Russian tanks enter South Ossetia Your perception of what constitutes someone's "backyard" is absolutely ridiculous. 1000 miles is nothing. In the past we have gone berserk over influence into South & Central America from Russia. Countries who are more than 1000 miles away from us.You also did not respond at all to what I said about Bush and McCain.If Obama's position was so bad, how effective do you rate the response from John McCain?You also completely missed the point about the hypocrisy. What gives McCain ANY moral authority to say, "in the 21st century nations don't invade other nations."McCain: "In The 21st Century Nations Don't Invade Other Nations" | HuffPost Latest NewsDid you completely and totally miss the point that we, the US, have invaded 2 countries in the 21st century?

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I disagree that this is entirely off topic. AE brought this up in the context of the the candidates responses to the situation which is entirely on-topic. Since then he has demonstrated that he really is not informed about the situation or about the history of geopolitics in this type of situation. That I agree should be remedied in a different thread.I would still like someone to comment, on Bush and McCain's response to the invasion. That is on topic and does speak to their ineptitude and frankly, dangerous tact that they have taken.I am not saying that Obama had the perfect response. I may even be critical of the it in that he seemed to get more hawkish the more he talked about it. But that does not change my opinion that what Bush and McCain did was not only not helpful, but unnecessarily antagonistic toward a country with whom we are already pissing off by installing missile defense systems on their borders.Plus, the effect of their "intervention" was to get told off by the Russians. What that better than what Obama did? Did it help anything at all?Putin knows that we can't do crap even if we wanted to. To get into it with Russia we would have to start up a draft and that would be suicide for the Republican who like to warmonger from behind podiums.

How many homes do you own? ...uhh....I'll have my staff get back to you.What is your position on insurance plans providing Viagra but not birth control? ....uhh...I'll have my staff get back to you.Its pretty obvious who is and who is not being handled in this campaign.I volunteered for the Obama campaign while he was here. Obama reads his own news and likes to get the local paper to supplement his own reading. McCain has to get Cindi to check his email for him.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

1. Obama wasn't in the Senate when the BAIPA was passed and he has said directly that he would have voted for that version of the bill.2. Obama did not support a state version of that bill that also included provisions for expansion of the ability to sue doctors and to limit standard abortion services. Despite that, it passed the Illinois senate and was killed in the house.3. There was already a law on the books in Illinois for the provisions in the BAIPA that protects infants born from botched abortions! Obama knew this at the time.4. The Illinois bill that failed passage was a poision pill put into contention just for this purpose, to unfairly slander good people.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Can you please debate in your own words and not youtube links? Not all of us have access to youtube all the time.You do realize that there were 2 bills right?You also didn't respond to any of my other 3 points.There was already a law in the books in Illinois and Obama knew that as he was informed by various medical associations in Illinois.Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Nem, I can't debate a link. Evn if I wanted to I cannot see youtube videos from where I am.You have not in fact responded to point 3 which is that under existing Illinois law, medical providers already had to provide care to infants born alive as a result of a botched abortion. Why purpose would lawmakers have to introduce a bill whos effect already existed in current legislation?Poison. Thats why.You also failed to mention that bill 1082 which you site was bundled with 1083: Link to BillThere are also problems with 1082 and especially its predecessors with regards to federal versus state jursidiction. The Federal BAIPA Act cannot ammend existing state legislation that regulates abortion but a state version can. It is a subtlty that get COMPLETELY lost when you have sites like worldnetdaily other right-wing fanatics howling 'BABY KILLER'.But in a civilized discussion, which I certainly hope we can have Nem, you can be pursuaded by this: Which when added is all it took for the law in Illinois to be passed. Heck, that version passed unanimously, even with the support from Planned Parenthood.Maybe you can go over that and figure out why. But if you are determined to smear Obama with only right-wing sources to back you up, if you honestly believe that a man like him does not care about life, then there is nothing I could ever say or do that would change your mind. At the very least the information is here for others who may not be so wrapped up in the hype.Edited by Jazzns, : No reason given.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)