McCain’s Stance on Torture Changes, Obama and Clinton Absent

In what may be a significant change in John McCain’s campaign, the senior senator backed the Bush Administration’s veto of the Waterboarding Ban. While the Democratic contenders both vocally support the ban, neither one was present for the vote in the Senate. They were busy on the campaign trail.

Dan Eggen of the Washington Post reports:

Bush’s long-expected veto reignites the Washington debate over the proper limits of U.S. interrogation policies and whether the CIA has engaged in torture by subjecting prisoners to severe tactics, including waterboarding, a type of simulated drowning.

The issue also has potential ramifications for Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), the presumptive Republican presidential nominee and a longtime critic of coercive interrogation tactics who nonetheless backed the Bush administration in opposing the CIA waterboarding ban. The Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama (Ill.), both support the ban, though neither was present for last month’s Senate vote for the bill that Bush is to veto.

  • Babs

    “though neither was present for last month’s Senate vote for the bill that Bush is to veto.”

    Well, are we surprised. Obama’s rhetoric for change is historically NOT backed up by his votes, and Hillary is not much better. I’ve reviewed every vote Obama has showed up for, they are all posted on his senate site. And I saw that it was not unusual for him to actually be there and vote on a particular bill, while “not voting” on other bills the same day – and some of the “non votes” were on issues that he NOW feels is so important to our country. And if you take the time to go over to the site and review his record, his excuse of running for President keeping him from doing the job he’s already been elected to do just doesn’t hold water.

    So, whether waterboarding is right or wrong, at least McCain weighs in for a vote, and he has a campaign to run, too.

  • Darryl

    Babs, you said that Obama does not vote sometimes when he is present and votes on other issues. I do not doubt the validity of what you say, what I do not understand is why this is not being used against him in the campaign? Could it be that Hillary is doing the same thing? I cannot imagine not seizing the opportunity to exploit this severe dereliction of duty, unless there is something that she wouldn’t want disclosed herself.

  • Babs

    Darryl, actually it’s been touched on quite a bit, and I believe alluded to by the Clinton campaign. The fact that it has was the reason I made the trip over to the Senate site to see for myself. I had read an article that stated he had voted against pulling troups out of Iraq in 2007, and I was looking to verify that information (the info was correct). I have no doubt Hillary is guilty of the same from what I have read, and that’s probably why she doesn’t expound on it herself. We may hear more of this type of thing between the republican/democratic run, though, if Obama wins the demo nomination.