You know, it's very confusing following John McCain's positions on torture.
After all, he's the most famous torture survivor in the country today.
And he's even been known to put up a principled stand again torture here and there in the past few years.
Ah, but that was before the 2008 presidential election campaign.
And today, he's truly clarified where he stands. John has completed his 180-degree turnaround from October 2005:
Senator John McCain yesterday warned that a push by the White House to exempt overseas CIA agents from a proposed ban on mistreating prisoners in US custody would exacerbate the problem of detainee abuse by giving interrogators legal authority to torture suspected terrorists.
''I don't see how you could possibly agree to legitimizing an agent of the government engaging in torture," said the Arizona Republican, who survived torture as a prisoner of war in Vietnam. ''No amendment at all would be better than that."
To this:
"I knew I would be criticized for it," McCain told reporters Wednesday in Ohio. "I think I can show my record is clear. I said there should be additional techniques allowed to other agencies of government as long as they were not" torture.
"I was on the record as saying that they could use additional techniques as long as they were not cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment," McCain said. "So the vote was in keeping with my clear record of saying that they could have additional techniques, but those techniques could not violate" international rules against torture.
Um, but John, it is the present position of this administration that waterboarding is not torture (at least unless it is performed on the attorney general). So by urging the president to veto this bill, not only are you dignifying "additional techniques" (i.e. torture), you are explicitly condoning waterboarding.
Which will it be, John?