What did Joe Scarborough mean when he pointed out that torture had in fact "worked" on McCain?

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Scarborough_90_of_Americans_would_approve_1019.html

(Video at link)

Scarborough: '90% of Americans' would approve waterboarding

David Edwards and Jason Rhyne
Published: Friday October 19, 2007

MSNBC host Joe Scarborough says that the controversial interrogation tactic known as waterboarding -- a method of simulated drowning used by interrogators to extract information from subjects -- is an effective practice that most Americans would overwhelmingly approve of if asked.

In a discussion about US Attorney General nominee Michael Mukasey's refusal to rule out waterboarding as a method of gathering intelligence during confirmation hearings this week, Scarborough said the technique had achieved proven results.

"For those who don't know, waterboarding is what we did to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, who is the Al Qaeda number two guy that planned 9/11. And he talked," said Scarborough. "A lot of people say torture doesn't work, torture doesn't work. And I'm not here saying that we need to torture. I'm just saying, for the record it is a matter of historical record, that when we water boarded Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, he started talking, and he kept talking."

"If you ask Americans whether they think it's okay for us to waterboard in a controlled environment," the host said later, "the New York Times editorial board will not like the results of those polls because 90% of Americans will say 'yes.'"

Asked later if he thought waterboarding qualified as torture, Scarborough wasn't so sure.

"You know, that's the debate. Is waterboarding torture?" he asked. "I don't want the United States to engage in the type of torture that John McCain had to endure."

Scarborough said that even though McCain was a staunch opponent of torture, he pointed out that that torture had in fact "worked" on the senator.

anything he wasn't supposed to during his POW time?

But according to a 11/06/07 CNN poll, 69 percent of those polled said the technique is torture; 58 percent said U.S. shouldn't use it. That hardly sounds like overwhelming approval.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/11/06/waterboard.poll/

he's a blowhard and a dimwit.
Plus he's mean.
Mean people do indeed suck.
And Joe sucks just about as much as you can possibly suck.

Can't wait for the day Mika just pops him one. : - )))

said that he was not able to withstand the torture he was subjected to. He was broken. He (like anyone else) would say anything to get them to stop.

Scarboroughs insinuation that McCain somehow gave up some "secret" or useful information that he had been trying to conceal is a real load of crap, and If I were McCain, I would probably head on over and punch him in the mouth...

to save his own skin.

They pop up occasionally depending on how our media feels about him.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1999-03-25/news/is-john-mccain-a-war-hero/1

effects? The enduring effects of the torture he went through are pretty obvious. He supposedly can't extend his arms all the way nor comb his own hair and he had nearly every bone in his body broken.

is after a lot of isolation and beatings, he finally signed a statement, that was written 'for' him saying that the US was flying illegal missions and bombing North Viet Nam. I think they pulled his arms backward, over the top of his head and dislocated his shoulder joints. Those poor men that were held in Hanoi, suffered horribly. I felt very sorry for John McCain after seeing that made for TV movie that aired a couple of years ago. What bothered me so much was hearing Rush Limbaugh make fun of him for it. He just wants sympathy and to show what a hero he was. That, oh whatever, he's not a real Republican, anyway, because he's a moderate and unless you are a hard-line conservative Republican, you don't stand for anything.

There is much we can criticize McCain for, but in my opinion, what he suffered as a POW and any statements he has made about it are off limits. I don't even think it's right to speculate on what he may have meant on something he may have said. I believe he acted with honor and survived in a situation that killed many.

The only way to talk about it is to read his book, see exactly what he said and ask him a direct question - and not in an ambush sort of way. If he recants a statement or fine tunes it, he gets a free pass - on that.

The S&L stuff; his voting record; his pandering to the Bush administration while claiming to be a maverick; his statements, mistatements, etc on every other issue - all fair game.

(I don't mean you, I mean the media whores, swift boaters, etc who ant to pick apart John McCain's history on this)

http://rawstory.com/news/2007/Swift_boat_vets_attack_John_McCains_0116.html

(video at link)

Scarborough: 'Disgusting' Swift Boat attack on McCain could help him

David Edwards and Muriel Kane

Published: Wednesday January 16, 2008

Sen. John McCain's military record is under attack in South Carolina by a group linked to the Swift Boat Veterans who attacked Sen. John Kerry in 2004.

The Vietnam Veterans Against John McCain are charging in a mailer that McCain has distorted his own record and that he revealed valuable information when he was captured by the North Vietnamese.

MSNBC's Joe Scarborough asked correspondent David Shuster about the charges, saying, "That seems to be about as low of an attack as I've seen."

Shuster agreed emphatically. "They're suggesting, 'Oh, when John McCain was being tortured, he stopped being tortured because he gave up information about US aircraft and their flight patterns over ...' It's crazy!"

"That's disgusting," commented Scarborough. "It's going to obviously blow up and actually ... even help McCain."

I only watch his show because CNN hasn't become The Today Show II, and Mika Brezinski is super-bright and smokin' hot.

Joe is a worthless pos.

.