mjn, there are a million articles about the clear differences on their social issues. but i really dont care, if you are a pro-life single issue simpleton then by all means think what you like, all this election cycle is proving is how little power the christian right really has.

MJN, giuliani is nothing like hillary clinton, unlike mitt romney, who is a virtual clone of hillary. he is someone so desperate for power he will say anything, do anything, change every position and conviction he ever had if it means duping you, very much like her thighness.

And I really, really don’t like Hillary Clinton, which is why I would prefer any Democrat over her. One of my major problems with Hillary is that she’s provided evasive answers on questions of torture, which I find totally unacceptable.

Another question. Do you think cutting off someone’s air supply almost to the point of asphyxiation would constitute torture? True, it might not cause any physical pain, leave any scars or kill that person, but in my mind, that is torture.

A: i feel it is wrong, but then again you and i differ on what constitutes torture.

Q: Do you think torturing someone who we are not sure is guilty, who we think might be innocent is wrong?

A: again, torture is wrong, but we disagree as to what torture is.

Q: Do you agree with Dana Rohrabacher that it’s worth it to torture 10 innocent people to get 90 terrorists in jail?

A: no i do not agree, because i don’t believe in torture.

the arguement isn’t whether i support torture or not, its what constitutes torture. a procedure that causes no physical pain, no physical damage, and puts no one’s life in danger, to me, is not torture. you disagree. waterboarding is essentialy scaring the shit out of someone. when dealing with prisoners of war, who may or may not possess knowledge of acts of war against the united states, i think scaring the shit out of a few of them is something we can stomach.

now i doubt i have convinced you that waterboarding is not torture, but since you believe it is, there are a few other techniques that you should be aware of, and should question your democratic leaders about.

in the mid 1990s, president clinton permitted the use of the REACT belt in the US Marshall service and in federal prisons. the belt is a restraining device that applies 50 kV of electricity to the muscles in the area of the kidneys. now, noah, you said the following:

‘Democrats care about human rights and about protecting what this country stands for. This is America. We don’t stand for torture.’

well maybe you don’t noah, but president clinton sure does, according to your definition of the word torture. and both the former president and senator clinton have left an exception open, the same exception rudy giuliani and other republicans made, that in the ‘ticking time bomb’ scenario, ‘torture’ would be ok. it seems to me that you have issues to take up with your own candidates, rather then attacking mine.

matt, I thought about copying and pasting your last like 5 posts here and responding to each little issue, but I just don’t feel like it. I’m sick of arguing with you.

But one thing I will point out is, how can you say things like “you are one of the liberals who had zero problem leaving someone like saddam in power.” ? I assume that means you have read through all of my past writings, emails, correspondences with people, maybe even tapped my phones? matt, don’t make these kind of arguments when you don’t even know what my opinion is on this issue, since you haven’t even asked me.

I will ask you this though. Please answer the following questions with a yes or no. I will give you my own answer as well. Please don’t go off on any tangent. These are simple questions, and if you can’t answer them with a simple yes or no, you are falling into the same moral relativism that you and your party accuses me and my—oh, wait, I haven’t asked you if you think liberals are moral relativists. So I won’t accuse you and “your party” of making these statements. So please, answer yes or no:

Q: Do you think torturing someone who we know is guilty of terrorism, and who has admitted to being a terrorist, is wrong?

A: I answer that yes, it is wrong. Torture is wrong. You?

Q: Do you think torturing someone who we are not sure is guilty, who we think might be innocent is wrong?

A: I say yes. It is wrong. And you?

Q: Do you agree with Dana Rohrabacher that it’s worth it to torture 10 innocent people to get 90 terrorists in jail?

A: I say, no it’s not worth it. You?

Please answer those questions. They are simple. Torture is not a morally relative gray area. You either think it’s right or you don’t. You can’t just go with a little bit of torture when you feel like it.

The reason I bring this up is because you say “we don’t stand for torture, noah, but we are also not stupid.” To me, there is no “but” with torture. It is one of those issues that you could say, “You’re either with us or against us.” One of the types of issues that George W. Bush could understand because there are only two possible answers.

That is all.