http://blogs.chron.com/bluebayou/2007/02/john_mccain_the_chameleon_from.html

Today he thinks Roe v. Wade should be overturned. But in 1999 he didn't think Roe V. Wade should be overturned:

I'd love to see a point where Roe vs. Wade is irrelevant, and could be repealed because abortion is no longer necessary. But certainly in the short term, or even the long term, I would not support repeal of Roe vs. Wade, which would then force women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations.

Now he does. I guess he's decided that forcing women in America to undergo illegal and dangerous operations is no big deal after all.

Which is why I cannot vote for him no matter who he's running against.

I'm guessing that in 2008, Republican candidates are going to be sorry the "flip-flop" weapon was ever employed against John Kerry, because it's sure going to be used agains them.

Andrew

Wait a minute.

I think Mitt Romney did the same thing.

But both of them changed their position after evaluation over time, actually years.

What about Mrs. Clinton coming out TODAY saying that we should leave Iraq with a 90 day timetable?

Flip that.

Herb

Ok, that's a big part of why I like Obama and Edwards over Hillary.

Right, Herb. When Republicans change their positions, it's because of "evaluation over time." When Democrats do it, it's because their flip-flopping, right?

Andrew

Bush could use a bit of 'evaluation over time' thinking to help his decider actions.

The country is more ready for a Black woman President than they are a Mormon.

"When Republicans change their positions, it's because of "evaluation over time." When Democrats do it, it's because their flip-flopping, right?"

If it's an insincere and pandering flip, then I'm with you.

But in this case, please show me where I'm wrong.

Herb

Well, let's establish what you would accept as being wrong. What would have to be shown to you to make you believe that you are being a hypocrite?

Or maybe you wear that badge with honor too.

If it's an insincere and pandering flip, then I'm with you.

But in this case, please show me where I'm wrong.

Unfortunately, the Republicans didn't approach John Kerry this way in 2004, did they? That's my whole point. After the "flip-flop" thing they pulled on Kerry, they deserve the same treatment in future elections: to be accused of political pandering whether it was a sincere change of heart or not - because John Kerry was given no such consideration. NEVER.

Andrew

Look.

If Mr. McCain just changed his mind last week, like Mrs. Clinton, I'm with you.

But how about someone who has shown a definite change over time?

Herb

You mean like back and forth?

Seriously, pot meet kettle black.

OK - so that's a " Yes. I am being a hypocrite. It's justified to me."

Clinton didn't change her mind last week, Herb, any more than John McCain did last week. Again, you think that Kerry and Clinton only change their minds due to political winds changing but McCain could do it only about of honest, deliberate thought. Why is that?

Andrew

"Again, you think that Kerry and Clinton only change their minds due to political winds changing but McCain could do it only about of honest, deliberate thought. Why is that?"

Mrs. Clinton's track record is one of opportunistic disingenuousness. I would say it if she were a republican. As an example, given his drug use whilst bashing addicts, Rush Limbaugh shares her hypocrisy. Are you happy now?

Herb

"Mrs. Clinton's track record is one of opportunistic disingenuousness"

She pales in comparison to Bush.

Maybe, so far.
I'm not willing to find out.
If you dislike Mr. Bush's actions so much, then you can appreciate my concern.

Herb

Nixon was a pussy and so is McCain! He should be kicked in the nuts for letting the DUHbya administration kick him around in 2000 and 2004!
Stand up for yourself!
McCain reminds me of Nixon.... When the going get's tough... CUT AND RUN!

Flip Flop!

Uh, Trixter.

You chose the wrong person to call a derogatory name. Mr. McCain is a far more decent man than you and I will ever be, COMBINED.

I'd suggest you take that back. Don't go so viciously partisan on something like this.

Here are just two reasons why:

http://www.vietnamwar.com/johnmccainbio.htm
http://content.answers.com/main/content/wp/en/thumb/6/66/180px-Nixon_greets_POW_ McCain.jpg

Herb

John McCain deserves respect for bravely enduring his ordeal in Vietnam. As a politician, however, sorry, but he's a total sellout.

His state reels under illegal immigration, but the industries which employ them support his campaigns, so he avoids the issue.

Blindsiding his own party gets him lots of face time on news shows, even on SNL, so he's happy to be the only Republican trashing his own party. Now, he wants its support.

In the name of "campaign reform", he co-authors a law that prohibits his opponents from criticizing him in the media in the period just before an election, a clear advantage for incumbants.

Now, he's mulling a campaign financed outside the campaign finance laws he endorsed.

The change on abortion may be the only sincere thing he's done in years. He doesn't need to go there to win the GOP nomination, in fact, it will probably hurt him.

The only logical basis for referring to abortion as a "woman's issue" is an assumption that the fetus is not a human being. If that's your belief, then it's the moral equivalent of cutting your fingernails.

If you believe...or come to accept over time...that a fetus is a human being, then abortion becomes the moral equivalent of murder.

It is not hard to understand why this issue cannot be successfully argued in either direction. The only position I can't understand is anything in the center!

I found it amusing today listening to conservative talk host Mark Levin refer to John McCain as "John McLame." Apparently he's rubbed some conservatives the wrong way, LOL! His recent comment about Rumsfeld being the worst SecDef in history pissed a lot of people off on the right I think.

Andrew

"But in this case, please show me where I'm wrong."

The mere act of your typing.

Talk about flip-flop;

I always watch with interest, the point in all the races, when each candidate, after sinking as low as humanly possible in their attack ads and such, suddenly go " OK. I'm not going to win. I now ENDORSE my rival." They do it with such a straight face. THAT'S America at it's worst; You didn't fall for my bullshit like I had hoped...maybe you'll buy this last lie.

I dunno, guys.

I can pile on almost any candidate.

But John McCain spent 5+ tortured years with a broken body in a Vietnamese hell-hole...AND DIDN'T FREE HIMSELF WHEN HIS MURDEROUS ENEMY GAVE HIM A CHANCE TO LEAVE, FOR PROPAGANDA PURPOSES.

If he were a democrat, I'd love him just as much.
To be honest, he's probably too good to be president.

Herb

I greatly admire John McCain, however, as I have said before, he is all too willing to sell out who he is, to please his party. No term fits those actions better than "flip-flop."

I am reminded of an interview that I believe shrub's Mommy did on AM Northwest during the 1980 campaign. She expressed a pro-life stance and then went mum on the issue for decades to preserve her husband. Does anyone else remember this?

If one wants to call him a 'sell out' to a particular party platform or party position, I can live with that. And I can't necessarily say I would place him at the top of any of my 'dream Presidential tickets.'

However, I'm saddened and even angry when comments like Trixter's are not refuted.

So let me correct a previous sentence I made: Given all he's been through, and all the horror he has suffered by a vicious and notorious enemy, Mr. McCain is easily a braver and more noble man than virtually every single male in the state, especially including me. He IS too good to be president and should be on the Joint Chiefs of Staff or Secretary of Defense.

Herb

I see your point.

Sorry about being partisan, but I gotta tell you I'm not gonna support the GOP on anything until the current power structure is completely cycled out.

If a little dirt helps that along, I'm perfectly ok with it. I've been harmed just a bit much by the GOP to really give them any solid consideration.

Third party people are a ready option, but only if doing so does not strengthen the GOP.

This just in:

http://texaskaos.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2644

One of many core reasons why.

Get over it Herb!
McCain did....
Nixon took it to his grave...

Senator John McCain asks, "What would you do to stop wasteful spending in Washington?"

Want to answer McCain's question?

http://www.yahoo.com/s/517300

Senator, how about ending the war?