"If he didn’t mean what he’s saying about Iraq now he wouldn’t be saying it. For me, that’s all that really matters.”?!?!?!?
So he lied before, but he says what you want to hear and that means he is not lying now? Really?
2Hotel9 - 05:04pm on 04/29/2008
I love the extremity of the positions displayed here: some seem to hold that any change of position is a flip flop and therefore the new position - and the person holding it - is necessarily bad. Others seem to hold that since a given politician has changed position, the change of position is a flip flop and therefore it is never bad for a politician to flip flop.
Changing one’s opinion, in and of itself, isn’t a flip flop. A flip flop is changing a position back and forth (and even back again) for the mere sake of expediency. Were a person to never change their position - regardless of any new information, or the perspective that time and space from an event can bring - would in fact be evidence of a serious character flaw.
A good leader - hell, a good person - should be steadfast but not stupidly stubborn.
Seth Williams - 06:04pm on 04/29/2008
Repubs turning on their own? Wow. I didn’t think the principle was there to pull it off.
Hannitized - 09:04pm on 04/29/2008
Changing one’s opinion, in and of itself, isn’t a flip flop. A flip flop is changing a position back and forth (and even back again) for the mere sake of expediency.
I COMPLETELY.....agree.
In 2005, McCain decided Iraqis resent our military presence, so we should reject a Korea-like model for long-term troop deployment. He insisted that “U.S. ‘visibility’ was detrimental to the Iraq mission and that Iraqis were responding negatively to America’s presence — positions held by both Obama and Clinton.”
In 2006, McCain reversed course, and embraced the Korea model for a long-term military presence.
In 2007, McCain reversed course again, saying the Korean analogy doesn’t work and shouldn’t be followed. “[E]ventually I think because of the nature of the society in Iraq and the religious aspects of it that America eventually withdraws,” McCain told Charlie Rose last fall.
And in 2008, McCain reversed course yet again, deciding that we should be prepared to leave troops in Iraq, even if it means 100 years or more.
Hannitized - 10:04pm on 04/29/2008
Link, H. You quote a lot of stuff and you never link to it.
That’s dishonest.
Kenny - 02:04am on 04/30/2008
Link, H. You quote a lot of stuff and you never link to it.
That’s dishonest.
Kenny - 02:04am on 04/30/2008
You can always Google Kenny. But it’s a reasonable request.
"If he didn’t mean what he’s saying about Iraq now he wouldn’t be saying it. For me, that’s all that really matters.”?!?!?!?
So he lied before, but he says what you want to hear and that means he is not lying now? Really?
I love the extremity of the positions displayed here: some seem to hold that any change of position is a flip flop and therefore the new position - and the person holding it - is necessarily bad. Others seem to hold that since a given politician has changed position, the change of position is a flip flop and therefore it is never bad for a politician to flip flop.
Changing one’s opinion, in and of itself, isn’t a flip flop. A flip flop is changing a position back and forth (and even back again) for the mere sake of expediency. Were a person to never change their position - regardless of any new information, or the perspective that time and space from an event can bring - would in fact be evidence of a serious character flaw.
A good leader - hell, a good person - should be steadfast but not stupidly stubborn.
Repubs turning on their own? Wow. I didn’t think the principle was there to pull it off.
I COMPLETELY.....agree.
Link, H. You quote a lot of stuff and you never link to it.
That’s dishonest.
Link, H. You quote a lot of stuff and you never link to it.
That’s dishonest.
You can always Google Kenny. But it’s a reasonable request.
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/15370.html
What, you didnt like the link?