Presidential candidates I Would and Would Not Vote For

It always makes me happy when a new poster like lone star madam comes along and makes me look thoughtful and mature.

Clinton
Biden
Obama
Richardson
Edwards

Absolutely not keryy gore or lieberman although I like gore.

No republican being talked about presently under any circumstances.

Swimipy, Don't write him off just yet; it's still too early to determine that. Obama has charisma that is infectious, because he's smart, articulate, and speaks of gaining back cooperation between the two parties. He's one of the freshman congressman, but knows the history of the old guard where democrat and republican congressmen used to be friends outside of their jobs, and worked to improve our country rather than divide and destroy like the current administration.

We must have hope for the future of our country, and I believe Obama is just the man to get it done. He has the energy and right goals for our country. I also believe in the American People to come together with good leadership.

John McCain was one of the "yea" votes on this legislation, authorizing Bush to define "torture."

This article collects excerpts from recent articles in the Seattle Times and the Washington Post. Some politicians, it seems, have decayed to the point of wickedness.


The Bush administration has proposed exempting employees of the Central Intelligence Agency from a legislative measure endorsed earlier this month by 90 members of the Senate that would bar cruel and degrading treatment of any prisoners in U.S. custody.
The proposal, which two sources said Vice President Cheney handed last Thursday to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) in the company of CIA Director Porter J. Goss, states that the measure barring inhumane treatment should not apply to counterterrorism operations conducted abroad or to operations conducted by "an element of the United States government" other than the Defense Department.

McCain, the principal sponsor of the legislation, rejected the proposed exemption at the meeting with Cheney, according to a government source who spoke without authorization and on the condition of anonymity. McCain spokeswoman Eileen McMenamin declined to comment. But the exemption has been assailed by human rights experts critical of the administration's handling of detainees in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"This is the first time they've said explicitly that the intelligence community should be allowed to treat prisoners inhumanely," said Tom Malinowski, the Washington advocacy director for Human Rights Watch. "In the past, they've only said that the law does not forbid inhumane treatment." Now, he said, the administration is saying more concretely that it cannot be forbidden.

The provision in question -- which the Senate on Oct. 5 voted 90 to 9 to attach to its version of the pending defense appropriations bill over the administration's opposition -- essentially proscribes harsh treatment of any detainees in U.S. custody or control anywhere in the world. It was specifically drafted to close what its backers say is a loophole in the administration's policy of generally barring torture, namely its legal contention that these constraints do not apply to treatment of foreigners on foreign soil.

The republican nominee will have just as easy a time showing people that underneath a thin layer of charm and promises, lies the heart of just another tax-raising, pro-choice, weak-on-national-security democrat president.

Granted that none of these are probably your concerns, but they are for most citizens.

Gad. Is there some solemn pledge that you and others here have signed which obligates you to tie a bunch of cliches together and then present them as some sort of evidence you are engaged in actual thinking?

monte cargo wrote

Quote:

The republican nominee will have just as easy a time showing people that underneath a thin layer of charm and promises, lies the heart of just another tax-raising, pro-choice, weak-on-national-security democrat president.

Granted that none of these are probably your concerns, but they are for most citizens.

Gad. Is there some solemn pledge that you and others here have signed which obligates you to tie a bunch of cliches together and then present them as some sort of evidence you are engaged in actual thinking?

Anyone running under the republican banner is unacceptable. I wouldn't vote for a republican even he were running for dog catcher. And that includes Mc Cain and Rudy. Who would I vote for? I will have to wait and see who is running. I am looking for that elusive honest person. But alas we are talking about politicians are we not.