Re "Shame, Sen. McCain," editorial, Feb. 19
So Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), desperate to curry favor with the Republican Party's right wing, voted against Sen. Dianne Feinstein's (D-Calif.) anti-torture bill. I guess we can assume that McCain was against torture before he was for it.
I never agreed with most of McCain's politics, but I used to respect him because he stood against his party when necessary, and especially because of his opposition to torture. But now he votes against banning "enhanced" interrogation techniques? That has made me lose what little respect I had left for him. We must have a zero-tolerance policy on torture.
Re "McCain's ties to lobbyist questioned," Feb. 21
I'm appalled. Another politician who may turn out to be like other human beings, who typically strive to have friendships, romances and, yes, even sex in their lives. And this is newsworthy? Yes, I get it: (politician + lobbyist) x personal relations = political/ethical problem. But let's face it, "personal relations" are not the problem in the equation; it's simply human. So what about lobbying?
Wouldn't it be much more newsworthy to focus on the issue: whether or not it is indeed a process that conforms to the principles of a democratic system? As for personal relations, my preference would be to leave them out of the media. Unless a politician is bedding Osama bin Laden or the pope, please don't waste journalistic talent and people's time on personal relations. We have much bigger problems to worry about.