McCain "Flip Flopping" on lots of stuff...

[AnthroAndStargate]

I have never posted in P&N before, I don't like getting in flame wars etc.

This is interesting though for people who are either against McCain or trying to look at more (of course if you are for him you will find a way to justify all this away just as Obama supporters would do the same, becuase lets be honest, everyone is always polarized thinking their world view is the correct one).

Anyway that being said, I am shocked at how much McCain has switched positions to tow himself in line with the neo-con GOP agenda. I don't see why he would do that, he is running unopposed in the GOP, he could have gone Neo-Con lite and still won the nomination probably (or split the religous conservative base and lost I guess, so nm).

Anyway here is the link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22...1/vp/25465984#25465984

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Watch an O'rielly or Hannity commentary on Obama and even yourself out. Both Candidates have more flip-flops than a Pac Sun.

 

[First]

McCain has done a complete 180 on immigration and taxes, huge issues to flip flop on. As much as the right hates Obama, they know they can't pin that level of flopping on Obama (who, of course, has flip flopped).

At least it's not Bush. :laugh:

 

[AnthroAndStargate]

Originally posted by: Rockinacoustic
Watch an O'rielly or Hannity commentary on Obama and even yourself out. Both Candidates have more flip-flops than a Pac Sun.

Thats why I gave the disclaimer that I knew Obama fanbois would say the same thing for Obama. What is interesting though is McCain/neocons/the right try to paint a picture of consistency but much like the democrats that is never the case.

 

[nick1985]

Because Obama doesnt have a record of flip-flopping?

 

[nageov3t]

flip-flop really needs to be a bannable term.

 

[Dari]

It's OK, he's a war-hero.

 

[Craig234]

Obama is building a record of some flip flops (see the NY Times editorial thread). McCain is hugely more 'flip flopping' IMO. And I'm someone who likes 'flip flops' *for good reasons*.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Dari
It's OK, he's a war-hero.

:roll:

Why is it every post of yours involves mocking McCain's service in some way, shape, or form? You know that doing so is a loser for the dems...right?

 

[Rockinacoustic]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb
McCain has done a complete 180 on immigration and taxes, huge issues to flip flop on. As much as the right hates Obama, they know they can't pin that level of flopping on Obama (who, of course, has flip flopped).

At least it's not Bush. :laugh:

While that may be true, I find Obama's changes within the past months/year more alarming than McCain's over nearly the past decade as portrayed in the OP's video. Both Candidates are cheerleading to their given masses; to say one is more is better because he does so less is silly.

Originally posted by: AnthroAndStargate

Originally posted by: Rockinacoustic
Watch an O'rielly or Hannity commentary on Obama and even yourself out. Both Candidates have more flip-flops than a Pac Sun.

Thats why I gave the disclaimer that I knew Obama fanbois would say the same thing for Obama. What is interesting though is McCain/neocons/the right try to paint a picture of consistency but much like the democrats that is never the case.

You think the Republicans are going to paint themselves in a negative way? That's politics. Both Parties are inconsistent, except that the Republicans consistently win when it matters

 

[Lemon law]

Nor are all the flip charges always fair.

For example, when Obama signaled some flexibility on Iraq, he now has to come back and say that does not mean I have totally ruled out withdrawal as my primary strategy
as many people were taking one comment and reading into it, far more than was meant by Obama.

In the case of McCain waffling on Mexican immigration policy, that too is partially understandable because we elect Presidents and not dictators. And its futile for a McCain to promise legislation that he may have advocated, but its now apparent, no likely future congress will pass.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Lemon law


For example, when Obama signaled some flexibility on Iraq, he now has to come back and say that does not mean I have totally ruled out withdrawal as my primary strategy
as many people were taking one comment and reading into it, far more than was meant by Obama.

Are you his campaign advisor or something?

 

[First]

Originally posted by: Rockinacoustic


While that may be true, I find Obama's changes within the past months/year more alarming than McCain's over nearly the past decade as portrayed in the OP's video. Both Candidates are cheerleading to their given masses; to say one is more is better because he does so less is silly.

It's politics, everything is silly.

In this case, though, the reasoning is still common sense. If Candidate A did 180's on the war (from "pull out now!" to "stay forever!"), the economy (from "ban the Fed" to "gov't cures all ills"), and on taxes (from "Tax the rich" to "Tax the poor"), while Candidate B flip flopped on school vouchers from "They're necessary" to "They less necessary than I said they were last go-around"....well, if you don't get the reasoning by now you never will.

Obviously the distinction here on flip flopping isn't that clear cut (both candidates have flipped obviously). But the degree to which someone flops is without question relevant. Like I said, this is politics, everything is silly.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: nick1985
Because Obama doesnt have a record?

Fixed. I don't really like either, but I'm slipping more and more towards McCain. Most recent slip was due to Obama agreeing to use public funding to level the playing field, then switching at the last moment. I'm sorry, but that's not a flip-flop. That's a blatant lie.

I'm not saying McCain's a saint, but he appears to be the more honest candidate IMO.

 

[Fern]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
Nor are all the flip charges always fair.

For example, when Obama signaled some flexibility on Iraq, he now has to come back and say that does not mean I have totally ruled out withdrawal as my primary strategy
as many people were taking one comment and reading into it, far more than was meant by Obama.

In the case of McCain waffling on Mexican immigration policy, that too is partially understandable because we elect Presidents and not dictators. And its futile for a McCain to promise legislation that he may have advocated, but its now apparent, no likely future congress will pass.

Pretty much agree.

I don't think that Obama maintaining some flexibility with regards to Iraq is bad thing, or a flip-flop. Events can change fairly rapidly and Feb '09 is a long way away. It's smart to adjust your plan as events change. Let's wait until we get to Feb '09 and see how the situation is there, and what Obama's plan is before we judge him.

McCain - I don't like to watch vids, but his immigration policy isn't a *finger in the political wind* flip-flop. He went ahead with his immigration plan and got his @ss handed to him - big time. No need for him to keep pursuing that; he learned his lesson the hard way and admits it. That's far different from a flip-flop.

I assume he's accused of flip-flopiing on oil drilling, but jeebus the price of gas has changed so radically he'd be a fool not to reconsider. Might as well accuse all of us of flip-flopping on that on that one. The American people (even Dem's themselves) now want to drill.

Tax Policy? Everyone seesm to agree we're in, or headed towards, a big recession etc. It's stupid to raise taxes in a recession. here again, changing circumstances dictate reconsideration. Most of us would like less gov spending too. But better be careful as that is recessionary also, and again at the wrong time.

I'm OK with slightly bumping up taxes on the rich ($1 million or more IMO), and more changing of spending to domestic investment (roads and bridges along with some extended unemployment benefits) than mere cutting.

If they (who ever is in power) aren't careful, they'll just make our economic problems worse in pursuit of some ideological BS.

Fern

 

[ProfJohn]

First I think both of them have made some hugh flip-flops.

But there is a reason that McCain gets a pass and Obama gets hit over the head.

First McCain has a LONG record to look at which gives us a lot more to judge him on.
Obama though has a short record and thus we can't look at what he has done on the past in order to figure out how he will act in the future.

Second, McCain's flip-flops have taken place over a longer term of time. He was against tax cuts 5 years ago, but claims to like them now.
That is FAR different than Obama supporting the DC gun ban in March and then claiming that he supported the recent court ruling against the same gun ban. He was for public financing last year, but he is against it this year. These aren't changes based on a long term evolution of thinking, these are changed based on 'what is best for me today.' McCain can claim that his flips are based on a better understanding of the issues while Obama's flips just look like political opportunism.

Finally, Obama's lack of a record means that we have to judge him based on his campaign statements far more than McCain who has a record we can look at. Thus if Obama can be shown to flip-flop whenever it makes political sense then he can be cast as nothing but an opportunist who will say whatever it takes to win. If that view of him starts to stick then he is in big trouble. He can make all the pretty speeches he wants but the people listening will be wondering if he means what he says.

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Dari
It's OK, he's a war-hero.

:roll:

Why is it every post of yours involves mocking McCain's service in some way, shape, or form? You know that doing so is a loser for the dems...right?

So it's OK for him to pimp his Navy service (and that qualifies him to be President somehow) but it isn't OK for people to make fun of him because of that? Go cry me a river. You're too damn sensitive. Grow a pair.

 

[Specop 007]

OBummer or McStain.

How in the hell have we gotten to this point??

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: nick1985
Because Obama doesnt have a record?

Fixed. I don't really like either, but I'm slipping more and more towards McCain. Most recent slip was due to Obama agreeing to use federal funding to level the playing field, then switching at the last moment. I'm sorry, but that's not a flip-flop. That's a blatant lie.

I'm not saying McCain's a saint, but he appears to be the more honest candidate IMO.

I don't remember him agreeing to use federal funding. It must be in your mind.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Dari
It's OK, he's a war-hero.

:roll:

Why is it every post of yours involves mocking McCain's service in some way, shape, or form? You know that doing so is a loser for the dems...right?

So it's OK for him to pimp his Navy service (and that qualifies him to be President somehow) but it isn't OK for people to make fun of him because of that? Go cry me a river. You're too damn sensitive. Grow a pair.

Given that he was actually a POW, severely tortured, interrogated, and put in solitary confinement for 2 years, and still refused early release to deny the North Vietnamese propaganda material; I think he has more of a right to pimp his record than, say... John Kerry and his 3 purple hearts.

In any case, I haven't seen nearly as much pimpage on McCain's part.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: nick1985
Because Obama doesnt have a record?

Fixed. I don't really like either, but I'm slipping more and more towards McCain. Most recent slip was due to Obama agreeing to use federal funding to level the playing field, then switching at the last moment. I'm sorry, but that's not a flip-flop. That's a blatant lie.

I'm not saying McCain's a saint, but he appears to be the more honest candidate IMO.

I don't remember him agreeing to use federal funding. It must be in your mind.

Sorry, meant "public funding".

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Dari
It's OK, he's a war-hero.

:roll:

Why is it every post of yours involves mocking McCain's service in some way, shape, or form? You know that doing so is a loser for the dems...right?

So it's OK for him to pimp his Navy service (and that qualifies him to be President somehow) but it isn't OK for people to make fun of him because of that? Go cry me a river. You're too damn sensitive. Grow a pair.

In all actuallity, McCain is pretty silent about his service. He may make mention here and there, but not sermons like you seem to think he does. He definately does not 'pimp' it. I think he is rather humble. You are an idiot. Go cut me a switch. Grow a backbone.

 

[nick1985]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: nick1985

Originally posted by: Dari
It's OK, he's a war-hero.

:roll:

Why is it every post of yours involves mocking McCain's service in some way, shape, or form? You know that doing so is a loser for the dems...right?

So it's OK for him to pimp his Navy service (and that qualifies him to be President somehow) but it isn't OK for people to make fun of him because of that? Go cry me a river. You're too damn sensitive. Grow a pair.

Given that he was actually a POW, severely tortured, interrogated, and put in solitary confinement for 2 years, and still refused early release to deny the North Vietnamese propaganda material; I think he has more of a right to pimp his record than, say... John Kerry and his 3 purple hearts.

In any case, I haven't seen nearly as much pimpage on McCain's part.

He doesnt, Dari just likes to think he does for some reason.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: loki8481
flip-flop really needs to be a bannable term.

Look on the bright side.

Neither side can use it to their advantage anymore.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: nick1985

In all actuallity, McCain is pretty silent about his service. He may make mention here and there, but not sermons like you seem to think he does. He definately does not 'pimp' it. I think he is rather humble. You are an idiot. Go cut me a switch. Grow a backbone.

Are you kidding me? How many campaign ads of his pimping his military service do you want me to link you? He's more then welcome to use his military service as a credential if he wants to, I don't have a problem with it. Hell, I don't blame him for doing it, I would do the same thing in his place. What else can he possibly run on? His actual positions are hugely unpopular. To say that he only 'mentions it here and there' is utterly ridiculous.